A fairly poor essay from last year, Just missed out on a 1st somehow though
Compare and Contrast Two Films With Political Themes:
âGoodnight and Good luckâ & âIn the Loop.â
 Both âGoodnight and Good luckâ and âIn the Loopâ are acclaimed films looking at political issues. In juxtaposition the differences of the films are immediately apparent; one tells the story of a group of political actors and the other the struggles of a team of journalists and broadcasters. Indeed the similarities end entirely at genre on the surface. Goodnight and Good luck is even produced in black and white and set in 1950âs America compared to the modern day, and Technicolor âIn the Loop.â However a combination of issues surrounding political communication that both films touch on makes the texts comparable; both this and the social context in which the films were set. In particular times of conflict tension.
 It is often in war that history recites our most extreme charters of human nature and both films demonstrate this. Murrowsâ struggle was set in the McCarthy years, a time post WWII, where America feared communist aggression. âIn the Loopâ of course is a reflection of the times prior to the invasion of Iraq in the present day war. During these times the news media acts as a crucial medium for relaying vital information to the public that may be confused or fearful. However, for politicians, the media offers a very different set of tools. Goodnight and good luck sees the battle between McCarthyâs desires too use the media news to create fear and distrust amongst people, and Murrowâs plight to bring down the fear mongering senator; a plight captured in the tagline for the film âWe will not walk in fear of each other.â The film also touches on the indirect censorship of journalists via the pulling of corporate sponsors; the company Alcoa pull theyâre funding of Murrowâs show when he goes after McCarthy, leading to the eventual termination of Goodnight and Good luck. During the closing speech Murrows refers to the closing down of shows like his to be changed to entertainment shows, which were more sponsor-friendly and less dangerous. The speech from the film was taken from Murrowâs actual speech at the RTNDA awards of 1958. The original of which ran:
 "There is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television could be useful. Stonewall Jackson, who knew something about the use of weapons, is reported to have said, 'When war comes, you must draw the sword and throw away the scabbard.' The trouble with television is that it is rusting in the scabbard during a battle for survival."
 The accuracy of Murrowâs speech today creates an enduring picture, and captures the purpose of the broadcast journalist: To act as a balance and check against power and to provide the public with the truth âhowever unpleasant that may be.â Today, like Murrow predicted even News is focused at entertainment with all but the BBC reliant on revenue, the news has to be entertaining to retain viewers and thereby sponsors. This leaves the news having to act fast to provide the most current information possible. This allows politicians and companies to pollute the news with press campaigns and propaganda. In its attempts to candor to the interests of the public, the news media fails to take time to investigate â like Murrowâs team- and thereby serve the public interest.
 âIn the Loopâ sees several examples of this, which causes disturbances on both sides. Firstly we see the near-destruction of Simon Foster, the lettuce limp hero of the story, when journalists feed theyâre habit of collecting sound bites, without any real story. Foster foolishly uses the phrase âclimb the mountain of conflictâ which then gets turned into a sound bite, and despite it not being his views, this sound bite ironically becomes all he is remembered for. This is the fault of journalists, although the film focuses on another major issue of political communication: Keeping on message. âIn the Loopâs realist approach to the world of politics demonstrates a key flaw in traditional models of political communication which ordinarily involve the message of political actors being broadcast by the media to the public accurately so the public may understand and have their say. How can political actors relay information of what the government are doing, when they do not know what the government are doing and they are faced with hard to process information as to what the official government message is.
 Diagram shows the distribution of information once it has reached the broadcaster.
 This raises interesting questions on both texts, conveniently on the title of one of the films; who is âIn the Loopâ? The colloquial term refers to those who have a firm understanding of political protocol and events and are immersed in the inner circle, therefore informed of all that is going on. Information and understanding forms power in the world of politics portrayed in the film, in the same way as it does in goodnight and good luck (Murrows and his team has power because they have knowledge of events, and understand the political climate.) From the off it is immediately apparent that Simon Foster is clueless and unable to deal with high status pressure, despite the fact he seeks it, and shows frustration at having to deal with the trivial matters occurring in the ward. One of these trivial problems eventually becomes his downfall, in the form of a collapsing wall. The one time Foster has power is when he initially threatens to resign, but he is easily talked around. When he eventually does try resolve and resign Malcolm Tucker is prepared for him, and uses it to his advantage. Tucker spins it immediately that Foster has been sacked over failing to deal with the wall. This is conveniently timed to work as a distraction piece as we see Tucker easily trick a naĂŻve BBC into prioritising the story of the wall over a paper that was published against the war, but then not read, and eventually amended to read as pro war. Malcolm Tucker is the whip of all whips, and aid to the prime minister, a man who certainly is in the loop. This is demonstrated when Tucker speaks on the PMâs behalf without consultation. He knows exactly what the PM wants. The comical element of Tuckerâs character is the way he keeps in the loop and in power; by running himself almost to death, to arrive in the knick of time, to curse the poor recipients into oblivion. This character trait is flawed twice in the film. Firstly when the secretary gains more power than Tucker by knowing where he needs to be when he is lost; Secondly when Tucker confronts the General, the first man not to be the least bit scared of Tucker, and the only man who Tucker is unsure how to manipulate, so he deals with him in his usual array of insults. The news media are certainly not portrayed as being in the loop, and actual problems with political communication in the modern age are perfectly demonstrated: The news media are reliant on the government to act as an open informant; this means information can be manipulated and held back and lower level political actors are often a distraction to the media, and canât really speak with any authority for what is happening in government. Overall a satirical look at British politics and political ineffectiveness of communication.
 With itâs beautiful greyscale sets and de-saturated imagery, itâs easy to dismiss the romanticised âgood night and good luckâ as a serious text, but the film still highlights the importance of power in political communication. Murrows and his team act as a successful power check, by questioning the political communication of McCarthy, unlike the BBC in âin the loop.â Murrowâs power lies in the fact that he has fewer constraints on time, and has a 6man workforce at his dispense to investigate and accumulate knowledge to use against McCarthy. In an age of instant news, there is very little time for the journalist to act as an investigator and guardian of civil liberties. Indeed were there a modern day McCarthy I fear his messages of hatred, suspicion and discrimination would be read by the news media like a press release, and the public would buy it without any check made. Murrows refers to the power of television being wasted, and this power lies in its ability to accurately investigate political communications, rather than to simply channel out propaganda, It also refers to televisionâs capabilities to explain and investigate, but unfortunately it is wasted on entertainment and becomes nothing more than âa box of lights and wires.â Murrowâs sentiment comes from the reduction of his show to a half hour from a full hour, and to it being moved to a Sunday, due to indirect corporate censorship; political pressure and ultimately the publicâs dwindling interest in the truth as sponsors and networks continue to push brand friendly entertainment through the hyperdermic syringe into the arms of the public. A harrowing prediction of the times we now find ourselves slipping into.
 If there is any hope for true journalism it lies in our hunger for the truth, and ultimately citizen journalism. If sponsorship for accurate, unbiased reporting is unavailable, it is up to the public to demand it, and to seek some truth for themselves. Although citizen journalism is easily criticised for its low quality, and itâs accuracy may also be criticised, it has been used to great effect in such incidents as the protest of the Monks in Burma 2007 and in other war environments. The camera can capture the harsh realities of life, and perhaps the best may find themselves someday in a newsroom environment that provides them with the time and equipment to find stories and tackle giants.Â
