It’s a friggin’ TV show! Though I’d love to see Hollywood’s reaction if the military brass went out and shared their concerns about some other shows. Just friendly advice, don’t mind the Blackhawk they flew in on.

Posted by Judge Smails on 27 February 2007 @ 7pm

You should read the linked New Yorker article about the impact that “24″ has had on troops. A new generation of soldiers has joined up with “24″ as their understanding of how interrogation should (and does) work.

Posted by Waldo Jaquith on 27 February 2007 @ 8pm

But at West Point?! A little sad, a little scary.

Posted by MB on 27 February 2007 @ 9pm

Per your suggestion, I did read it, Waldo. Now if you could just get me to read The Nation on a regular basis, right? ;)

Very good article. I agree with one of its main points which was that using ruses or building rapport with a prisoner is the most effective interrogation technique. But as the show’s creators point out, it would be tough to incorporate those methods into a one hour (actually 44 mins of footage) program on a show whose season is supposed to take place in a day.

Posted by Judge Smails on 28 February 2007 @ 8am

Hey, The New Yorker might be liberal, but it’s really a brilliant publication. At least twice each month I’ll read an in-depth article in The New Yorker on a topic that I have never, ever heard of before or cared about and, not a week later, that topic is the single most important thing in the news. It makes me look like a freaking genius. Some tiny country gets invaded by some tiny group of rebels, and I’m the guy at the dinner party that knows the interesting bits about the life story of the head of that band of rebels. Much as effective use of Google can raise your apparent IQ by at least 20 points, reading The New Yorker raises it by another 20. :)

More on topic, I, too, was sympathetic with Surnow’s point that building rapport and coaxing information out of a suspect would just be boring on TV. It wouldn’t be an action show, it would be a drama, and probably not a very good one.

But given Surnow’s attitude about the whole thing (he clearly favors torture, and doesn’t care what impact that the show is having) I don’t feel particularly sympathetic. I suspect that there are plenty of ways that he count help counter the growing belief among impressionable young recruits that torture is effective, a la “24.” Sutherland speaking to troops is a good start. Heck, if he launched a whole anti-torture publicity campaign, the fact is that it’d only be good for the show. It would get more attention, more people would watch it, and it would even become game for intellectuals who might now think that the show is beneath them.

Posted by Waldo Jaquith on 28 February 2007 @ 10am

To be fair, there are times when torture in 24 has backfired, and times when innocents are mistakenly tortured. But it is the exception.

And, frankly, while the torture scenes were an interesting deux ex machina in the first few seasons, they’ve become predictable now. It’s really not that interesting to see someone get injected with an unknown substance, writhe in pain, then give up important info — routinely. It’s a convention they’d do well to discard, both for the reasons cited in the article and because it’s not great for the show.

Posted by Jon on 28 February 2007 @ 10am

You don’t know how right you are, Jon (unless you read the New Yorker piece, too.) The show’s head writer was interviewed and had this to say:

A character named Burke—a federal employee of the C.T.U. who carries a briefcase filled with elephantine hypodermic needles—has proved indispensable. “He’ll inject chemicals that cause horrible pain that can knock down your defenses—a sort of sodium pentothal plus,” Gordon said. “When we’re stuck, we say, ‘Call Burke!’ ” He added, “The truth is, there’s a certain amount of fatigue. It’s getting hard not to repeat the same torture techniques over and over.”

Posted by Judge Smails on 28 February 2007 @ 11am

Ha, funny, JS. I skimmed the article, and I’d missed that part.

My wife and I watched the first five seasons on DVD this past year, and we’re currently watching season six. Seeing all the episodes in such close proximity has made me very aware of some of the tricks they like to use (though I still enjoy the show a great deal).

Posted by Jon on 28 February 2007 @ 3pm

Laura Ingraham on “24″:

The average American out there loves the show 24. OK? They love Jack Bauer. They love 24. In my mind that’s close to a national referendum that it’s OK to use tough tactics against high-level Al Qaeda operatives as we’re going to get.

Oy.

Posted by Waldo Jaquith on 28 February 2007 @ 5pm