When Did We Stop Trusting the Media? A Review of “September 5”

When did we begin to lose trust in the news media? There are plenty of theories. Some suggest March 6, 1981, Walter Cronkite’s last broadcast. Others suggest it was the coverage of President Bill Clinton’s perjury and impeachment. Others suggest it was the advent of 24-hour news stations.

The newest film from Paramount Pictures suggests another option in its title, “September 5.” September 5, 1972, is the day that the Black Sabbath militant group kidnapped Israeli Olympic athletes. In total, eleven Israelis were killed.

But according to the journalists at the center of the movie, none of that was nearly as important as making sure the “ABC” logo was on the TV screen while the coverage went on.

A brief epilogue about how the incident turned out ends with these eerie words, “900 million people watched.” 

“September 5” is interesting because, in a movie presumably about the attacks, we see none of it ourselves except through camera lenses and TV screens. It’s not a movie about the attacks at all; it’s a movie about watching the attacks.

The film opens as Geoff takes over the control room for ABC Sports. He’s running the night shift, when word comes in about the attacks. 

The ABC studios are yards from where the attacks are happening. So they rush Peter Jennings into the Olympic village, and put their own studio camera on top of the building so they can keep a camera on the room where the hostages are being held at all times.

Geoff wakes up his bosses, Marvin and Roone, who often debate the relative merits of their decisions, such as whether to turn the story over to ABC News rather than the sports division or whether or not to call the attackers “terrorists.”

These compelling arguments make for thoughtful viewing. Ben Chaplin, who plays Roone, an American Jew, does particularly good acting work as he tries to find a nugget of morality in what they are doing. 

But every argument ends with the decision being made that will best help ratings and ABC. No matter how many times they argue about good practices, such as waiting for a second confirmation that the hostages were all safe before reporting, the better angels of our trio of decision-makers always lose. 

By the way, the hostages weren’t safe, ABC did get the story wrong because they were relying on German state news, and Germany was trying to look safe and less militaristic in their first major international attention since the end of WWII. But for a moment, when the station thought the hostages were safe, their only concern was getting them in the studio for interviews. 

Marvin Bader tries to use the language of “the story” as though his audience deserved to have “the story” in real-time. And no matter what decision they made it was in pursuit of capturing the story. But this justification rang shallow as the movie moved on. When the German police burst in to get them to stop telecasting their rescue attempts live because the militants were watching, they stopped to get them to put their guns down, but turned the feed back on nearly as soon as they had left.

All of this makes this an engaging movie that is worth watching. When journalists are the main characters, we expect them to be the good guys. “All the President’s Men,” “Spotlight,” “The Post.” Even the film “Shattered Glass” about a dishonest journalist, spends more time highlighting the good journalists who caught him.

“September 5” doesn’t offer the media such a convenient way out. By making its characters clear-headed and conflicted, they are more than simple villains. They are exactly what the pressure of studio news would naturally produce.

There are real powerful forces driving the decisions of the news industry that are at odds with what is right or good, and all too often, there’s nothing we can do about it. If we are curious about how the spiral of trust began, this film serves as a worthwhile primer while being entertaining as all get out.

The film is rated R. It is thematically tough, dealing with questions like whether to broadcast an execution live, but none of the violence of the incident is actually seen the movie. In terms of a ratings feel, I might compare it to the film “Gravity” while using the word “f***” three more times than is allowed in a PG-13 film. I wouldn’t recommend this for young children or young teens, but the themes about how media manipulates us would be important for older teens, and I might consider watching this film with my kids once they turn 15 or so. 

If I did, I’d ask them questions about the nature of journalism. Is getting the story more important than the lives of the kidnapped Olympic team? Do we need to know about what’s happening in real-time on the other side of the world? How has constant news coverage made the world a better or worse place? What motivates those who choose what to show on the news, and how they tell those stories?

Four out of Five Stars. September 5 has already had a limited release, and it is rolling out in individual markets across the country through January. 

On Key

You Might Also Like

Welcome to Pride Month + Today’s Digest

Our daily rundown of the articles from around the web that we feel our readers would enjoy and appreciate. We hope to highlight the best of what’s around. Public Square Bulletin recommends: Welcome to Pride Month, Christian Carl Trueman—World Carl Trueman offers a full-throated call to oppose Pride month and its use of the rainbow symbol with the same drive that we oppose racist symbols such as Confederate flags and statues. New survey: corporations failing to respect religious and political diversity Jerry Bowyer—The Christian Post Paging Brian Grimm of the Religious Freedom and Business Foundation. Your work is desperately needed. A new report on religious and political diversity among corporations shows disappointing results, with the average score being 12 out of 100. Journalists might ask: Did fundamentalists actually win their debate with modernists? Richard Ostling—Get Religion One hundred years ago, Harry Fosdick asked if modernists or fundamentalists would win the fight for Christianity’s soul. Today many journalists seem to assume the fundamentalists won, but Richard Ostling invites them to re-examine that assumption. A Defense of Faith Statements Shirley Mullen—Heterodox Academy The easy assumption is that universities that require statements of faith to attend limit academic freedom. But a former president of one such university makes the case that by creating a community with shared beliefs, they are able to articulate a voice in a larger marketplace of ideas. The Problems of Putting off Children Nathanael Blake—Public Discourse The author had hoped to have children much younger than typical for highly educated, dual-career couples. But a combination of circumstances prevented that, leading him to have children at about the age many of his peers did. He has some thoughts about the drawbacks of this status-quo.

Visible Identities & Invisible People

It seems at times that American discourse is so engrossed in the intersectional categories of people (e.g., “that gay BYU student”), that we hardly see the unique person underneath the label anymore.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This