Talk about harebrained. Anti-drug czar Barry McCaffrey's new plan to "work
closely with major studios" to ensure that movies spotlight the dangers of
substance abuse won't do anything to rein in drug use. It will, however,
stomp on the free-speech rights of Hollywood writers and directors and divert
taxpayer money to companies that don't deserve it.
McCaffrey's plan, outlined to Congress Tuesday, will use a small part of his
$18-billion annual budget to reward studios that produce films showing
characters harmed "as a consequence of their decision to use drugs." It is
the latest installment in a billion-dollar, taxpayer-funded media campaign
that McCaffrey says has succeeded in exposing the average American teenager
to more than eight paid anti-drug advertisements each week. Is that how
he measures success? A better yardstick is McCaffrey's own
statistic showing that the number of illegal drug users age 12 and over
has not fallen in the United States since he stepped up media spending in
1996. Here's another statistic: Last year, McCaffrey spent
$178 million taking out anti-drug ads, most of them on television. The ads
are nicely enriching broadcasters and allowing them to cut the number of
money-losing public-interest spots they are supposed to
air. Ultimately, what's most troubling about McCaffrey's
idea of "leveraging" federal dollars to get studios to depict the "risks
and consequences" of illegal drugs is the degree to which it treads
on creative freedom. The financial incentives in the media drive are vague
but may include publicly funded promotions for films that, to use McCaffrey's
words, "communicate Campaign messages." Whatever the incentives, this is an
intrusive program. Would the government ask the producer of James Bond movies
to show 007 in traction in the hospital after every reckless car
chase? McCaffrey would be better off using his huge budget
to support anti-drug programs that work. For example, he could beef
up school-based drug counseling and ensure that all states have mandatory
treatment for drug users. In most states, especially California, there is a
huge gap between the number of drug abuse prevention programs needed and the
number of programs available. Gen. McCaffrey, would you
rather a would-be addict watch no-no messages in movies or have access to
swift and effective treatment? And why should we even have to ask such a
stupid question?
Hope you are enjoying your Tidbits. If
you're not a member of ReconsiDer and would like to join please fill out our membership form.And be sure to visit our website.