Ok, maybe the title is a bit wacky. So shoot me. As we all (or at least most Kossacks who've read the site in the past week or so) know that the first piece of ABC's defamatory
Path to 9/11 aired last night. What I didn't know was on last night until a friend of mine suggested we watch (we did) was the so-called "
Manning Bowl" football game of the New York Giants (with Eli Manning as starting QB) and the Indianapolis Colts (with Peyton Manning as starting QB). So how did these two young quaterbacks "save America"? Follow me below the fold to find out!
I watched
the game last night, only even mentioning
Path when "what to watch on TV" and 9/11 being the next day came up in quick succession in a conversation (I made the easy point of it being pointless propaganda, though the guy wasn't planning on watching it anyways). Decently exciting game, Colts took an early lead through a bunch of field goals, but the Giants managed to bring it back to within 2 points. A pretty bad pass interference call (denying a first down) and Eli throwing an interception let the Colts make it a 5 point game. Then, on the final drive I learned (I really had no idea they could do this) that refs can give penalties by removing time from the clock if there was less than a minute left. So, in the end (without time on that last drive to score) the Colts won by 5.
But how did that save America? Lo and behold I get onto CNN this afternoon and read an honest-to-goodness hard hitting headline.
Clinton, most Americans, skip ABC's 9/11 miniseries
Ooomph. That's got to hurt. According to figures in the article:
The movie was flattened in the ratings by the debut of NBC's Sunday night football, matching Peyton Manning of the Indianapolis Colts against his younger brother Eli of the New York Giants. The football game had an estimated 20.7 million viewers, while "The Path to 9/11" had 13 million, according to Nielsen Media Research.
The ABC movie did, however, beat CBS' third airing of its "9/11" documentary, which was seen by an estimated 10.6 million people, Nielsen said.
That has really got to hurt (please don't pardon me if I sound like I'm gloating, I am). Beaten by nearly 8 million in the ratings because of an interesting football game, and barely managing to beat out the third airing of something on CBS.
I feel confident for tonight partially for reasons mentioned in the article:
ABC resisted calls to cancel the $40 million miniseries, airing commercial-free over two nights. Part two was scheduled for Monday, with an interruption for President Bush's address to the nation.
Thought Bushian presidential addresses always scare me (we still have 2 Axis of Evil members left standing!) interruptions like a presidential address are going to make people either turn off their TVs or turn to some kind of news station if it puts them in a "news" mood. Also, a more obvious fact not mentioned in the article. Who watches part 2 of a miniseries they didn't watch part 1 of?
That second point makes me think even with it now really BEING 9/11 they won't get above their first-night figure of 13 million. Beyond that, I'd be willing to bet the combination of a presidential interruption and people who watched the first half not watching the second (if they agree that it was crap) their ratings will actually drop a bit (ooh, plus it's Monday night, a weeknight not the weekend).
The article spends most of it's copy covering the "changes" between the critic's version and the release version. Sometimes, such as the following scene, they seemed to almost make things even more partisan.
In the original scene, an actor portraying White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke shares a limousine ride with FBI agent John O'Neill and tells him: "The Republicans are going all-out for impeachment. I just don't see in that climate the president's going to take chances" and give the order to kill bin Laden.
But in the film aired Sunday, Clarke says to O'Neill: "The president has assured me this ... won't affect his decision-making."
O'Neill replies: "So it's OK if somebody kills bin Laden, as long as he didn't give the order. It's pathetic."
While anyone who has read the 9/11 Commission Report (or seen the excerpts posted around here) knows the Commission very readily stated Clinton told his advisors not to think about Lewinsky at all in other realms of executive business (I think the quote was something like "That crap is coming no matter what, don't worry about it") there is a key change. At least in the original version Republicans are called out for doing what they did, tying up this fictionalized Bill Clinton from enforcing security. Not reality, sure, but at least it laid blame at both sides like the Commission Report did. The new scene is just out-and-out calling Clinton pathetic. WTF?
So thanks Paul Tagliabue. Thank you Peyton Manning. Thank you Eli Manning. And, odd as it is to say, thank you President Bush. Thank you four for effectively delivering the closing blow to squash this little bug.