Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Bowing to pressure, Ken Burns decided to amend his new PBS documentary about World War I that did not include Latinos. Let's hope PBS now amends their decision-making process.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Ken Burns Is Better Than That!

By Rory O'Connor, AlterNet. Posted April 13, 2007.


Bowing to pressure, Ken Burns decided to amend his new PBS documentary about World War I that did not include Latinos. Let's hope PBS now amends their decision-making process.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Rory O'Connor

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

"It was Ken," said John Wilson, Senior Vice President & Chief TV Programming Executive for PBS, explaining the reversal of an earlier decision that no changes could be made to Ken Burns' forthcoming, magnum opus on World War II, scheduled to air in September. "Ken elected to make changes."

Controversy erupted recently because Burns and PBS had somehow inexplicably managed to construct the multi-hour, nationally broadcast public television series about the war without including any interviews with Hispanic-American veterans.

Previously, PBS executives had taken the steadfast position that nothing could be done to address community complaints over the omission because the film was already completed and they did not want to interfere with Burns' artistic independence.

"So what changed?" I asked Wilson. "What's being cut out and what's being added?"

"The film itself is still the film itself," he responded. "It is entirely intact. New content will be incorporated within the footprint of the series without changing the existing film. The footage remains the same. We will be able to incorporate additional material without ruining the core vision."

Pressed for specifics, Wilson admitted, "the details are still unclear," but said that the new plan "allows The War to go out with its emotional experience in place, while still acknowledging the Hispanic contribution."

Pressed further, he referred to a press release stating that Burns, "in consultation with PBS, will assemble a production team, including a Latino producer, to create the additional content, and will work with this team to insure that the new segments are consistent with the production values and sensibilities" of other segments of The War.

"What changed is that we are trying to walk a fine line of balance," Wilson concluded. "Listening to our audience while still respecting the artistic vision of our film makers."

What also changed -- but which he left unsaid -- is that the uproar within the Latino community, and the coordinated response led by an ad hoc coalition called Defend Our Honor, brought so much moral, political and financial pressure to bear on PBS executives that they were ultimately left with no choice but to allow changes to Burns' film.

The leadership of the campaign for inclusion first met with PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger little more than a month ago, at which point Kerger told them nothing could be done to address their concerns. Instead of accepting the decision, the group began involving academics, activists, politicians, veterans' groups and the media in a coordinated campaign to persuade PBS.

To their credit, Kerger, Wilson and other PBS officials finally began to listen. After a month of meetings, media reports, and political intrigue, they moved from rejection to acceptance. As this week's statement puts it, "PBS takes its mission to serve all Americans very seriously. Along with the independent filmmakers who work with us, we are deeply committed to listening to the public we serve."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: latinos, pbs, ken burns

Filmmaker and journalist Rory O'Connor writes the Media Is A Plural blog.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
"This instinctual approach, however, is clearly insufficient"
Posted by: kevred on Apr 13, 2007 1:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a problematic statement, because it can be applied in different ways.

One one hand, it's no way to run a network that's supposedly in place to represent the diverse palette of American history and experience. On the other hand, an individual artist should be well within their rights to make exactly the creation they want, whether it's based on instinct or not, and it's a pretty arrogant statement to make about an individual artist's work. Unless Burns is actually making inaccurate statements or otherwise misrepresenting the history, this seems like a pretty empty issue. There are always points of view that are left out of every documentary--being all-inclusive is impossible.

And is it even the artist's responsibility? It seems to me that the responsibility of the filmmaker is to create the work of art that they feel needs to be made, and the responsibility of PBS to make sure that the overall arc of their programming is inclusive. To have this level of corporate meddling into an individual filmmaker's specific work--as opposed to, say, commissioning someone to make a separate, standalone documentary about the Latino experience in WWI--strikes me as a bizarre notion of "balance" where no individual is really free to express their personal vision, where everyone's own expression must suddenly represent everyone else's as well.

To me, this type of after-the-fact tampering is akin to a museum asking Picasso to paint African-American figures into all his paintings instead of organizing a separate show of works by African-Americans. The end result is a distortion of the individual artist's vision, creating a superficial sheen of inclusiveness that hides the sad truth that every individual involved is corrupted by the arrangement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those that participated..
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Apr 13, 2007 2:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not sure how I see the Latinos complaint in this..It doesnt seem the film is a depiction of all ethnic groups involved in WW@.If it were this would be a different matter..The American Indians, Italian Americans, etc..etc.. would be lodging complaints.

We have entered a time where one can hardly say of produce anything without fear of a law suit by group thought to be wronged!

PBS also cancelled a documentary on Fanatical Islam..wonder who was behind that.. considering one cannot make a cartoon about Islam without fear of being blown up maybe they feared for all their employees lives!!.. That might be a better comment on Islam than the documentary itself!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a lame article
Posted by: hot karlrove on Apr 13, 2007 6:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I call this total, divisive BS. We on the left need to stop picking up minor complaints such as this. This is a non issue. Oh, and while some fake lefties keep peddling this issue trying to get it some traction(I first heard about this non issue over a month ago) how many US soldiers have died in Iraq?
How many Lations have died attempting to cross the border?
How many families have gone hungry?

Total bullsh*t.


Estimates are that at least 200,000 Mexicanos and thousands of Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics served in WWII.

TOTAL NUMBER IN UNITED STATES FORCES DURING WW2
ARMY: 8,300,000

NAVY: 4,204,662

MARINES: 599,693

GRAND TOTAL: 13,104,355


I'll bet Ken Burns , in attempting to tell the tale of some 13 million people has overlooked some other group as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What a lame article Posted by: Conservasaurus
I hope the DVD will be the original director's cut and not the Orwellian
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Apr 13, 2007 9:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
censorship film he was forced to make by the statist political correct doctrinarians. It is indeed a sad statement that an artist is forced, as like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, to change their work to accomidate the political views of the state and, frankly, anybody other than his artistic vision. Hopefully the censorship will stop but, alas, we see that both parties enjoy censoring speech and art-- whether its for 'political correctness' 'lewdness' 'unAmerican' 'rascist' or whatever excuse they find. Thier ultimate goal is for the only speech, art, or films to be 'approved' and fall in line with groupthink of the majority or of their corporate/government overlords. The proper way to censor is simply don't watch/buy the film. Not pressure the artist to change his vision. Sad indeed.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Burns is better?
Posted by: fifthworld on Apr 14, 2007 9:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why whine that "Ken Burns is better than that..."?? Maybe he's not. Maybe he's an excellent documntarian, but a mediocre, fair-to-middlin' person. An otherwise average guy. Maybe he makes mistakes, given a certain privileged American white male tendency of oversights and undervaluations (or misunderestimations?).

Just a thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Burns is better? Posted by: gregorywonderwheel
I thought PBS was going downhill.
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Apr 14, 2007 11:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So instead of "quality television", it's really "television to appease the complainers and the special interests." That would explain all the religious stuff, and some of the other boring crap they've been playing to death lately.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Speaking as a filmmaker....
Posted by: snarf on Apr 14, 2007 1:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...it's impossible for any given film to satisfy everyone. The great Russian filmmaker Tarkovsky said in the 1970s that Soviet filmmaking was deformed by politics, while Western filmmaking was deformed by the marketplace. Be that as it may, it makes no sense to alter a film every time a group objects to what the film says, or to what it omits. Personally, I wish the people who'd expended so much energy agitating for Latino inclusion in the latest Ken Burns epic had spent their time, and money, agitating for more funding for worthy Latino/a filmmakers!

By the way, PBS is the entity that, in the early 1990s, decided to halt production on its MOST SUCCESSFUL SERIES EVER (Tales of the City) because some viewers objected to its gay content. And there is currently almost zero gay content on PBS because of pressure from the right wing. Serving all Americans, indeed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

which world war?
Posted by: vera on Apr 14, 2007 10:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is some confusion as to whether Burns is documenting WW1 or WW11. Note that the opening paragraph refers to Burns" magnum opus on WW1." One of the comments also lists troop statistics for WW 11. The question should be, how many hispanics served in WW1?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what about...............who seved?
Posted by: drblack on Apr 15, 2007 2:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about,deaf,gay,native,Dwarf,one legged,snake handling,etc. Americans? How about those huh?
One day maybe it will be enough just to be an American.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HED Honcho
Posted by: hed1117 on Apr 20, 2007 8:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What about Israel? Nobody's blamed Israel yet for overlooking the Hispanics in Ken Burns' WW@ doc. Isn't it de rigeur on AltNet to blame Israel for everything?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Which War?
Posted by: gregorywonderwheel on Apr 23, 2007 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is the new documentary about "World War I" or "World War II"? The first two paragraphs disagree on this point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Give me a break
Posted by: arturod on Apr 24, 2007 11:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At a time when there is so much negative news about illegal aliens and hispanics in the mainstream cable news, from Lou Dobbs, to reports about illegal aliens draining tx resources, etc, it is important that we begin to think of Hispanic Americans as a positive contributing segment of of American society. 'm not saying that many of you think negatively about Hispanics, however, the media portrayal for the most part is negative: illegal immigration, drain on resources, not wanting to learn english, criminals etc, etc.... Hispanics are not yet entrenched into the political, social and cultural conciousness of America in the same way that African Americans, Italians, Irish people and others are. Look at the Immigrant rights rallies of last year. Mexican Immigrants got shit for waving the Mexican flag during those rallies. You don't see the same type of uproar when you see the Italian flag waved in little Italy in Ny or when they wave the Irish flag on Saint Patrick's day.

Hispanics are fighting to become accepted into American society and one way for that to happen is to show that we have LONG been productive members of American society.
Why are African Americans entrenched in consciousness of America? Because they fought to get it. They fought to be included. You look at commercials. You always see a white guy, a white girl and the black woman. Hispanics are typically left out even though they now make up the same proportion as African Americans in the U.S. Things have improved in the last few years with George Lopez, and other hispanic actors getting some leading roles, but still we are generally underrepresented compared to other ethnicities. Ken Burns has a large voice in America. Unfortunately, lots of people prefer TV, movies as their main source for history.

In Ken Burns' documentary, he reportedly has chosen to focus on World War II in a "bottom up" fashion through the lenses of four "quintessentially American towns" -- Luverne, Minnesota; Sacramento, California; Mobile, Alabama; and Waterbury, Connecticut. In the documentary, the Mobile Alabama segment tells the story of African Americans and the struggles they face with discrimination when they went back home. Sacramento, I believe, focuses on Japanese Americans and the internment camps and their role. so to say that Burns did not set out to tell the story of all ethnic groups is true. However, you could argue about his choices, "blah, blah artistic freedom", "blah..blah.. it's what he's familiar with, it's what is in his political, social and cultural consciousness". The bigger question is, why aren't the stories of Hispanics known as well as the stories of the Japanese and African Amercins during WWII. Especially, when they had significant contributions to the war effort:
e 158th Regimental Combat Team, known as the Bushmasters, an Arizona National Guard unit comprised of many Hispanic soldiers, saw heavy combat. They earned the respect of General MacArthur who referred to them as "the greatest fighting combat team ever deployed for battle."

In the Pacific theater, the 158th Regimental Combat Team, known as the Bushmasters, an Arizona National Guard unit comprised of many Hispanic soldiers, saw heavy combat. They earned the respect of General MacArthur who referred to them as "the greatest fighting combat team ever deployed for battle." Company E of the 141st Regiment of the 36th Texas Infantry Division was made up entirely of Spanish-speaking Americans, the majority of them from Texas.

The other segments tell stories of the midwest, rural america and the northeast.

Hispanics are just asking to become part of the consciousness of America and be thought of a contributing members or society, rather than getting dumped on as we have been by the pundits and the general media.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Blair
Posted by: Blair on Apr 27, 2007 7:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Ken Burns documentary does not exclude Hispanic American soldiers. It contains footage of Hispanic-American soldiers fighting alongside American soldiers from other ethnic groups. Hispanic Americans are upset because the documentary treats Hispanic Americans the same as Anglo Americans, Irish Americans, German Americans, Italian Americans, Jewish Americans, etc. The documentary treats Japanese American and African American soldiers separately because they were forced to fight separately in segregate units. Hispanic Americans soldiers, however, served as both officers and enlisted soldiers in integrated units.

I think Ken Burns' decision to include Hispanic American veterans in the interview segements is a good one. Hispanic Americans made up about one percent of the U.S. population in the 1940s and they should get about one percent of the interviews.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ken Burns Is Better Than That!
Posted by: painstaking on May 10, 2007 2:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
hardcore anal fucking - mature anal mature women porn videos free sex movies handjobs movies - handjob movies free movies dildo masturbation bachelorette party dominant transexual - free shemale gandi mukli fetishism transvestic fetishism transvestic sites hardcore gay bondage stories - erotic stories hardcore sex foot fetish gay leather outdoor shitting - pissing girls this comment not verified pictures of galerias voyeur gratis - on the beach add to personal links voyeur russian voyeur gratuit transgender sex - london escorts transgender community a transsexual for crossdressers hairy brunette - pictures of extremely hairy to other sites femmes poilues asian cum shot - movies free and getting deep throat cumshot movies sex cow - sex stories animal sex with human of bestiality hardcore sex big penis stories - photo click shopping basket large penis of your penis give a good blow job - lesbian sex free blowjob in these movies hardcore fucking GEFFEDEVS766GERTT9009ED hardcore anal fucking - mature anal mature women porn videos free sex movies xxx pictures - click here to interracial sex sex stories free sex movies altuna - picwars http privacy policy february 2007 marvel comics

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]