LA Times Insists We Take the January 6 Commission Completely Seriously, Reviews It Like TV Drama – Opinion

It is not apparent to the media how the Jan 6 Commission’s approach reflects poorly on the quality of its work.

We have been watching the Jan 6 Commission and the current hearings on TV for over a year. We are constantly hearing about the significance and importance of these hearings. However, the actions and behaviour of the press suggest the opposite. There has not been sane and sober analysis–as much as there have been hyperactive reports and melodramatics.

Look over some of the reactions from journalists on “findings” by the committee. On that terrible day, they shouted about Fox News hosts sending them text messages. However, the messages included calls to stop violence. The stampede to the cameras began when it became clear that there had been a gap of 7.5 hours in White House telephone logs. However, the corrective messages, after they were found in the entire logs, were never received.

Recently, Cassidy Hutchinson’s emergency testimony to Congress was broadcast. While many of her details were based on information that she had heard, some journos said they believed their words were even more crucial than Watergate testimony. They were so fascinated and exaggerated that they declared her words to be historic. Their reporting sounded like an old novel. Then on Tuesday, the committee shared a video of a White House meeting, and the press was captivated – by Sidney Powell drinking a diet soda on camera.

“We are serious journalists and the J-6 Committee hearings is serious. We need the American people to be serious about this.” pic.twitter.com/XJGeFAJaRV

— Brad Slager – Unique Taco/Lifetime CNN+ Subscriber (@MartiniShark) July 13, 2022

Following this example is now the Los Angeles Times. It has presented its general impressions of broadcasted hearings. It has adopted a strange, yet not surprising, approach to the broadcasted hearings. The fact that the paper is based in this entertainment hub is just one factor. But then there’s the added influence of the hearings. They brought in an ex-ABC News producer who staged the proceedings for cameras. This makes it almost inevitable.

The Times came basically with a review of the hearings on television/movies.

How the Jan. 6 hearings set the stage for a stunning prime-time finale https://t.co/7j2vWTLmo3

— Robert Greenwald (@robertgreenwald) July 14, 2022

It’s more than a headline. The article by Lorraine Ali – an actual Times TV critic – covers the hearing with all of the earnestness of someone who just binge-watched a program on Netflix. We are seriously given a rundown of things so far, in the same way one would expect from a reviewer who just watched a string of episodes of “Ozark.” That she believes this in any way elevates the committee and its findings is the mirthful aspect.

Like the penultimate episode of an intense TV drama, Tuesday’s hearing opened with a “previously on …” montage of flashbacks, advanced the narrative, then closed with a staggering cliffhanger. Vice Chair Liz Cheney (Republican from Wyo.), spoke in the last minutes of the three hour hearing. dropped the hearings’ most tantalizing bombshell yet, saying former President Trump attempted to call a committee witness, and that the committee submitted that information to the Department of Justice. Keep watching.

Dramatic convergence of all plotlines is evident. The 12-month character development has been rewarding for everyone. It sure sounds like “J-6 Comms” will be picked up for another season!

The structure is familiar to fans of serial television — and with each public revelation, the committee has only bolstered the expectation, like an expert writers room, that there are more surprises to come.

It is possible to get a TV critic to give us an overview of these hearings, considering they were held on television. This makes it seem like an investigation that is not legitimate. Thematic framing of the entire process and the way it is laid out gives the impression that this was a plot device for a drama serial. This is because they admit to us that it is fiction.

They cannot assume that we will believe the truth is being presented to them if they approach hearings from a Hollywood perspective. The spectacle is staged for TV and has all the trappings to make it dramatic. It is a viewing diversion that we won’t treat as anything more.

Maybe we will begin to take things seriously–as soon as the press begins doing so.