If Only Torture Were Really Ending.

Tonight is the Series Finale of 24. There was a time when I was a consistent viewer of this show, before my nerve-endings got the better of me and I realized I couldn’t fall asleep on the nights I watched the show.   But over the years, I stopped taking 24 for pure entertainment value and became a little disturbed by the constant use of torture for doomsday scenarios where a clock is literally ticking and the only way to save the country is by employing torture techniques to find out where the bomb or nuclear weapon is being hidden. And Jack Bauer always saves the day, so the torture is always worth it. Last fall, Glenn Greenwald spoke with a writer of Law & Order, who admonished other TV writers for their irresponsible embrace of torture, which you can read here. Shows like 24 perpetuate the public misperception that torture is both effective and an appropriate law enforcement strategy. In reality, it is neither.   These arguments play out in reality. I’ve heard first hand people saying torture must be allowed for such doomsday scenarios. The reality is that torture conducted under the auspices of “enhanced interrogation techniques” beginning in 2002 did not occur under doomsday scenarios, and they should not happen under any scenario. This 2005 article in The New Yorker  is a helpful reminder of what happened at Abu Ghraib.   So 24 may be ending, which I know is disappointing to many fans, but what really disappoints me is that the Bush-era tactics romanticized on the show still persevere. Predator drones, detention without charge or trial, proposed changes to Miranda rules, surveillance, and terrorist watch lists are currently used as national security measures. We may not see these tactics play out in our day to day lives, but that does not mean they are not employed.

May 24, 2010

Tonight is the Series Finale of 24. There was a time when I was a consistent viewer of this show, before my nerve-endings got the better of me and I realized I couldn’t fall asleep on the nights I watched the show.

But over the years, I stopped taking 24 for pure entertainment value and became a little disturbed by the constant use of torture for doomsday scenarios where a clock is literally ticking and the only way to save the country is by employing torture techniques to find out where the bomb or nuclear weapon is being hidden. And Jack Bauer always saves the day, so the torture is always worth it. Last fall, Glenn Greenwald spoke with a writer of Law & Order, who admonished other TV writers for their irresponsible embrace of torture, which you can read here. Shows like 24 perpetuate the public misperception that torture is both effective and an appropriate law enforcement strategy. In reality, it is neither.

These arguments play out in reality. I’ve heard first hand people saying torture must be allowed for such doomsday scenarios. The reality is that torture conducted under the auspices of “enhanced interrogation techniques” beginning in 2002 did not occur under doomsday scenarios, and they should not happen under any scenario. This 2005 article in The New Yorker is a helpful reminder of what happened at Abu Ghraib.

So 24 may be ending, which I know is disappointing to many fans, but what really disappoints me is that the Bush-era tactics romanticized on the show still persevere. Predator drones, detention without charge or trial, proposed changes to Miranda rules, surveillance, and terrorist watch lists are currently used as national security measures. We may not see these tactics play out in our day to day lives, but that does not mean they are not employed.