Showing posts with label BBC World Service. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BBC World Service. Show all posts
Tuesday, 3 October 2017
OJ SIMPSON: SPORTING WITNESS
I was interviewed by the BBC World Service programme Sporting Witness, to talk about OJ Simpson as he was being released from prison. My part of the programme was to put his football abilities into context, though I also experienced his charisma first hand at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992, where he was accompanied, I think, by Paula Barbieri (I'm not sure because he never introduced her, and there was a certain uniformity to some of his women: having just written about Hefner, you could see OJ buying into the whole Playboy Philosophy. Just check out his house before his lawyers gave it the right-on make-over!) You can link to the show here; it was produced by Simon Watts and it's worth a listen.
Saturday, 18 June 2016
MUHAMMAD ALI THROUGH THE EYES OF THE WORLD: THE TELEGRAPH REVIEW
Last week I spent four and a half hours on the BBC World Service's Newshour programme, adding commentary to Muhammad Ali's memorial service, which they were broadcasting live from Louisville. While I was going through my thoughts, some of which I'd posted here, or written for Newstalk.com and the London Review of Books LRB Blog, I remembered reviewing the aptly-named Muhammad Ali Through The Eyes Of The World, for the Daily Telegraph back in November 2001, when the film aired on ITV after a debut at the Sheffield Documentary Film Festival; I was writing quite a bit for them on documentary film at that point. Grabsky's film was trying to do the same thing we were trying to do 15 years later, provide elements of context for this great man's life, so I dug up my original draft of the article, which is slightly different from what appeared in the Telegraph on 10 November; it had been cut a bit for space. I found it moving that I'd concluding with Ali's message of peace--it took only two days after his memorial for America to taste murderous hatred again. And I was pleased that although Grabsky did indeed set a high bar, in the wake of Ali's death, there was a great deal of surpassing that bar. But here's what I wrote in 2001...
“I
shook up the world,” yelled Cassius Clay on February 25, 1964,
after beating Sonny Liston to become heavyweight champion. “The
world changed,” agrees a new documentary, Muhammad Ali: Through The Eyes Of The World.
Ali
has already been analysed by heavyweight authors. On film, William Klein’s Muhammad Ali: The Greatest was made in 1974; Leon Gast's exceptional smash hit When We Were Kings, about the Rumble In The Jungle, followed two decades later 1996. Will Smith will
impersonate Ali soon in a feature film directed by Michael Mann. With the
turn of the millennium,
Ali has been acknowledged as the past century’s
greatest sportsman. So do we really need another documentary?
Ali has been acknowledged as the past century’s
greatest sportsman. So do we really need another documentary?
“I asked myself the same question,” says ThroughThe Eyes Of The World's director, Phil Grabsky.
“What could I add to the canon? I felt what didn’t exist was a
film made for people who weren’t boxing fans, and I thought we
could add something for those who didn’t necessarily remember the
era.” Judging by the response of audiences when the film opened the
Sheffield Documentary Film Festival, where extra showings had to be
laid on, the answer is emphatically yes.
Grabsky’s film is built from interviews. Celebrities are a
selling point, of course, yet far from stealing the spotlight, stars
get transformed into fans when faced with idea of Ali. Richard
Harris refused to talk about the Burtons or Oliviers he’s worked
with, says Grabsky. “He said ‘that’s just tossers
talking about tossers, but I want to talk about Ali, because he’s
really significant.'
“I was fascinated when highly successful people made grandiloquent
claims for a guy who, in his own words, ‘beat people up for a
living’, Grabsky explains. “Big stars tend to isolate themselves
from their communities. Today how many of them would dare support political ideas
like Ali did?”
The film speaks eloquently the American apartheid from which Clay
emerged, and of his stand against the Vietnam war, but inevitably
the boxing footage steals the show. And celebrities may be celebrities, but people from the boxing world not
only tell the best stories, but prove the most adept at supplying the
wider context. When contrarian author Mark Kram claims Clay ‘didn’t change a thing’, Ring Magazine’s Burt Sugar explains exactly what Ali sacrificed
when he gave up his title by refusing to be drafted, and younger boxer
Howard Davis explains what that meant to those who followed him into the ring. When critic Stanley Couch characterises Ali’s embrace of ‘a gaggle of
lunatics’, the Black Muslims, as ‘insane’, sports writer Dick Schaap says he believes
‘only half-kidding’ that Ali was so malleable he, Schaap, probably could’ve
converted Ali to Judaism had he tried. Another sports writer, Jerry Izenberg speaks movingly
of how with him Ali transcended the ‘white devil’ message of the Nation of
Islam.
Grabsky is balanced and exposes bits of Ali’s dark side, his
womanising and his capacity for viciousness in the ring (as when
Ernie Terrell refused to call him ‘Ali’). But what stands out is the
way he uses boxing footage not only to portray the beauty of the
fighter in his prime, but also to show the conscious strategy, the intelligence that
lay behind Ali’s seemingly natural ability. Yet this footage has its own dark side, as we see Ali’s incredible
ability to absorb a punch, popping back up after killer blows from
Joe Frazier and Henry Cooper, the punishment he took long before 'rope a dope'.
Today,
the man who floated like a butterfly and stung like a bee is bloated
by Parkinson’s Disease, his spark as lively as ever but his ability
to speak almost gone. Grabsky reveals that towards the end of his
career, Ali fought while taking thyroid medicine which robbed him of
the very last shreds of his ability. Yet Ali regrets nothing. One friend
speaks for the audience: “he doesn’t regret it, I don’t know
why I do.”
For Ali always came back. Izenberg reminds us that when he won his
draft case in the US Supreme Court, the ultimate ‘beat the man’ verdict; the stand which had made him a hero to
the young, now made him the idol of ‘the limo crowd’. Did he
really change the world? Like the JFK assassination, or the Beatles’
invasion of America (and don't forget the Fab Four made a pilgrimage to Ali’s camp before the
first Liston fight) Ali helped usher in the Sixties; but forty years later he
still makes a difference. Were there any doubt about his importance, you
could see the man Presidents beg for autographs visiting the World
Trade Towers, living his role as America’s leading Moslem, standing
up for peace.
Is there still more to say about Muhammad Ali? Grabsky convinces us that
there is. But this film has set the bar just a little bit higher for
the next one.
Monday, 6 June 2016
MUHAMMAD ALI: WORLD SERVICE WEEKEND
Sunday morning I appeared on BBC World Service's Weekend programme to discuss Muhammad Ali. You can link to that on the IPlayer here, it's the first item on that half-hour segment, and it's very good.
I just wish I'd finished that Louisville story by mentioning Ali's story of throwing the Olympic gold medal into the Ohio River, which he later admitted 'might' have been apocryphal.
I just wish I'd finished that Louisville story by mentioning Ali's story of throwing the Olympic gold medal into the Ohio River, which he later admitted 'might' have been apocryphal.
Tuesday, 19 April 2016
OJ AND OUR AMERICA: THE CULTURAL FRONTLINE SCRIPT
A couple of weeks ago, I gave a talk on the BBC World Service's programme Cultural Frontline, tracing the influence and effects of the OJ Simpson trial; you can read my introduction to that in my post of 2 April, or link direct to the programme on Iplayer here; it comes about 14 minutes in. But for the time the show is no longer available, I thought I'd post my working script (with one footnote) here.
The essay was prompted by the showing of American Crime Story: The People vs O.J. Simpson on BBC television. As the series has now concluded, and I am about to write about it, and about the re-issue of Jeffrey Toobin's book about the trial, I thought this bigger picture might be instructive...
OJ AND OUR AMERICA
Was
it really two decades ago? Watching The People Vs. OJ Simpson
transported me back to that summer of 1994. After a stressful day in
charge of the host broadcast of the opening match of the FIFA World
Cup, I'd ordered room service in my hotel to watch the NBA basketball
finals, when the infamous white Bronco driven by OJ's friend AC
appeared in a box in the screen's lower third. Soon, the basketball
was relegated to the box, then it disappeared, as the strange freeway
convoy disguised as a police chase took centre stage. It was
presented just like sports coverage, because America's new national
pastime was television, and OJ gave TV everything it could desire.
It
was billed as the 'crime of the century', or the 'trial of the
century', but almost every decade in America produces at least one of
those. It actually was the television event of the past century, but
re-seeing it today generates far more than nostalgia. The Simpson
trial balances on two great axes: race and celebrity, and it is both
history and prediction. It is America defining itself, by its
unending racial schism, and re-defining itself, as Andy Warhol
foresaw, by celebrity.
The
mini-series sets the scene with the brutal beating of a black man,
Rodney King, by white Los Angeles police four years earlier, and the
massive riots which followed the cops' acquittal on criminal charges.
This signals the first crucial theme: the show dissects the way
Simpson's defense was based on the disconnect between black and white
Los Angeles. White America believed stars like OJ transcended race;
prosecutor Marcia Clark wisecracks that a jury of OJ's peers would
actually consist of 'middle aged white millionaires'. Black Americans
saw it differently.
The
narrative of OJ being framed by cops who resented his wealth and
fame, hated his having a beautiful white ex-wife, recalled
the Jim Crow era when
'uppity blacks' might be lynched for 'recklessly eyeballing' a white
woman. Whites saw OJ as a world apart from Rodney King, but OJ's lawyer Johnny
Cochrane knew they had one crucial thing in common, their skin; actor
Courtney
Vance milks every nuance of racism perfectly.
Twenty-two
years later, America has a black president, and something like 20 per
cent of the country believes he's a foreign-born Moslem educated in
terrorist cells. It's impossible not to feel the embers of prejudice
smouldering, waiting to be blown into flames by the next police
killing of an unarmed black man.
Race
was the strategy, but the trial was defined by celebrity. OJ had
always received special treatment from the police and district
attorneys in LA. It was easy to see why: when I met OJ while covering the 1992 Barcelona Olympics;, his
charisma was overpoweringly physical: he's big in a way Cuba Gooding, the actor playing him on TV,
cannot convey, yet moved gracefully with a chiselled handsomeness and
easy smile. In the face of his celebrity, the prosecution pulled on
kid gloves, but the money and sheer weight of numbers of the defense
team pounded every concession into a submission. Judge Lance Ito
preened for the cameras even as his head sunk beneath the quicksand; Clark and her assistant prosecutor Chris Darden saw
TV punditry in their futures.
The
mini-series plays the celebrity card knowingly, by highlighting OJ's
friend Bob Kardashian, played with his trademark insecurity by David
Schwimmer. Typically, there’s no mention of the garment bag
Kardashian removed from OJ’s house, with whatever crucial evidence
it contained (NOTE: This comment was premature. The bag did feature later, as Kardashian and AC opened it together to discover it contained nothing incriminating. That moment signalled the show's almost total acceptance of a changed Kardashian, Schwimmer being a character far more sympathetic. But I wonder.) Because what’s more important is that OJ was
godfather to Kardashian's oldest daughter, Kim, and there follows a
series of knowing winks at the soon-to-be-famous-for-being- famous
sisters.
The Kardashian phenomenon was,
in effect, enabled by the Simpson trial. It brought together the new
world of 24 hour news and multi-channel television in a perfect
storm, creating a parallel universe in which the trial became a
catalyst for endless argument, speculation, innuendo, and punditry,
full of cliché and sophistry, all about style and process, not about
substance.
This
legacy haunts us today. Not just in the morass of trash television,
but in the trash television that has been the two-year cycle of the
American presidential elections—an endless series of so-called
debates in which nothing is debated, filling countless hours of
airtime. Donald Trump, most of whose supporters believe that Barack
Obama is a foreign terrorist, steps seamlessly from awarding pretend
jobs on scripted reality shows, to playing a candidate in an endless
reality show. Indeed,
his candidacy would not be possible were it not for the OJ trial.
The
primary voters themselves are like the jurors in a series of OJ
trials, distracted by the big money dream teams of consultants who
make TV commercials, believing in the celebrities they know from TV,
and unable to escape the inflammatory rhetoric that invokes that
shadowy cloud of ever-present racial divide. The Simpson trial
created the Kardashians and empowers the Trumps; it is the template
for today's America, glued to its TV screens, understanding nothing.
Monday, 7 March 2016
THE MANNING LEGACY
I've written a piece about Peyton Manning's retirement for Newstalk in Ireland, you can link to it here. They changed the title; I was hoping for a little of that Bourne Conundrum kind of feel to 'The Manning Legacy'. We shall see. You can also find me talking about Manning on BBC World Service Newshour yesterday: link to it here. I starts about 32 minutes into the piece. I'll also be on BBC World TV News tonight, on Sport Today, probably during the 19:30 bulletin.
Sunday, 3 February 2013
SUPERBOWL 47: THE BBC WORLD SERVICE WEEKEND SCRIPT
As I am in New Orleans to broadcast the Super Bowl for BBC television, I recorded an audio essay for the BBC World Service's Weekend programme, for whom I have been a studio guest a number of times. It was broadcast between 7-9 this morning; if you can access the World Service online, you can probably find it, but if you can't, here's my original script. I don't know if the recording was then edited down, and I have added one line to it as well, but this is a look at the Super Bowl aimed at a worldwide audience assumed to know very little indeed about it...
Forget Thanksgiving,
Christmas Day, or even the Fourth of July—Super Bowl Sunday may be
America's biggest holiday—at least it's the day when more Americans
indulge themselves, at the same time, in their REAL national pastime,
watching television.
At 6:25 Eastern more
than 45 per cent of the country will turn on the Super Bowl, the
championship game of the National Football League. At halftime,
reservoir levels will drop all across the country as millions of
people flush simultaneously. The real audience is probably bigger
than the television ratings show—because people watch together,
with families, at parties, in bars, & the possibility of reaching
some 160 million or more viewers means a 30 second commercial during
the game costs $4 million. The three networks who rotate broadcasting
the Super Bowl reap a revenue bonanza that more than justifies their
three years covering the regular season without the championship
game.
The adverts themselves
become must-see items. Audiences anticipate mock football matches
between puppies or beer bottles with almost as much enthusiasm as
they do the real thing. For those not crazy about football there's
the pregame show—with Alicia Keys, and the halftime show—a 40
minute extravaganza starring Beyonce. Bookies are offering bets on
everything from what colour Beyonce's hair will be, or whether Keyes'
version of the National Anthem will run over or under 2 mins 15
seconds, to even the score of the game itself.
Oh yes, the game. It
matches the Baltimore Ravens, named after Edgar Allen Poe's poem and
coached by John Harbaugh, against the San Francisco 49ers, named
after the 19th century gold rush and coached by John's
little brother Jim. As far as the media is concerned, it's
Harbaughgeddon! ...no sibling rivalry since Cain and Abel's will have
been discussed in such depth by more people so unqualified to analyse
it!
That's because there are 5,000 media covering one game, and they
have little else to talk about. On media day, Tuesday, hundreds of
them descended on the players scattered at podiums around the
stadium, all trying to ask a question so ridiculous no one else will
have thought of it before. TV Azteca sent a woman reporter dressed in
very little at all, insuring only that many American males can now
name Mexico's second-biggest network. For the rest of the week the
media talk only to each other and any ex-player with a story to tell
or something to sell. They wander around the media center looking to
add to the din of a hundreds of hosts shouting into the vast void of
sports talk radio.
Or they talk about the
miracle of New Orleans and its recovery. The city has always been
America's most exotic, but during super bowl week it becomes a theme
park, a kind of santizied version of mardi gras, the excesses of
football replacing the somewhat wilder excess of Fat Tuesday. Large
portions of the French quarter have been taken over by television
networks, meaning Jackson Square, right opposite the French Market
and Cafe du Monde, is now off-limits to anyone not wearing broadcast
credentials and makeup.
There are other
stories: will the Ravens Ray Lewis retire at 37 with a second
championship ring? Did he use New Zealand deer antler velvet extract
to help heal a torn biceps? Deer antler velvet; I am not making this up. Oddly enough, when a former 49er, tackle
Kwame Harris, was arrested back in San Francisco this week after a
restaurant scuffle with his boyfriend, it re-triggered an ongoing
controversy over the acceptance of gay players in America's most
macho game. And how will the league address the growing issue of
concussions and brain damage, especially considering this Super Bowl
matches two teams known for their physicality, in a game not known
for lacking it.
Finally, however, the game will kick off, and, despite frequent
breaks for commercials and Beyonce, America's eyes will be focussed
on the field. Which Harbaugh will triumph? In a game that generates
gold, to the extent that they award the winner's trophy not to a player, but to the team's owner, it may be the gold rush 49ers, and brother Jim, who win in the end.
Labels:
Alicia Keyes
,
BBC World Service
,
Beyonce
,
Jim Harbaugh
,
John Harbaugh
,
Kwame Harris
,
New Orleans
,
Ray Lewis
,
Super Bowl
,
Weekend
Wednesday, 29 December 2010
MICHAEL VICK AND TUCKER CARLSON (NO RELATION)
I was on the BBC World Service's World Update today, discussing President Obama's praising Philadelphia Eagles' owner Jeffrey Lurie for giving quarterback Michael Vick a second chance after he served 19 months in prison for running a dog-fighting ring and abusing his dogs. I was all set to talk about how Obama might have been trying to push his proposed expansion of the Second Chances Act in Congress (Lord knows enough Congressmen have got second chances, and more), and how Tony Dungy has mentored Vick, how Andy Reid has brought him along slowly and transformed his quarterbacking, and how both those coaches had personal tragedies with their own wayward children. I was also prepared to discuss the agenda of the animal rights advocates who use Vick as a way to generate publicity, and the right-wingers who use him as another club to beat Obama over the head with his own blackness. But the conversation was hijacked into that last direction by an unexpectedly virulent clip from Tucker Carlson, the Bow-Tie-That-Talks who plays an intellectual on Fox News.Carlson (who is no relation to me
and that is for real sure) said: 'I’m a Christian, I’ve made mistakes myself, I believe fervently in second chances. But Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did in a heartless and cruel way. And I think, personally, he should’ve been executed for that. He wasn’t, but the idea that the President of the United States would be getting behind someone who murdered dogs?'This is fascinatingly hypocritical on so many levels it's hard to know where to start. But let's start with Tucker's so-called Christianity, which sounds a lot more like a version that ends a long time before Jesus actually came along. What happened to turn the other cheek, walk the extra mile, cast the first stone--well, maybe he thinks it's up to him to cast at least a few stones. Executed for killing dogs? Maybe we just nuke the Dominican Republic and do away with cock-fighting there once and for all. More importantly, it's easy to forgive Tucker Carlson's kind of mistakes, like selling yourself to promote the rich and powerful by using hate and fear. But as I understood Christ's message, it was that you needed to forgive people for the really hurtful, awful things they do. That never sunk in
very far with Tucker. Vick, meanwhile, has done the Christian thing and not responded in kind, though the old Mike Vick might have sent the sort of message to Mr. Carlson indicated on the right.The second, more important message, of course, is the coded reminder that Barack Hussain Obama, as Fox called him, is, uh, black. And that if you ever vote for him again he's going to release hordes of his dog murdering fellow blacks on you--Willie Horton's mutant offspring stealing your daughters, lowering property values, and integrating your Christian academies. Michael Vick is a lot easier a target than, say, Henry Louis Gates, who was merely an uppity black man who wears a bow tie and bristled when accused of breaking in to his own house.
I understand the animal rights people who say 'if he'd done this to people he'd still be behind bars' or 'abusers of dogs and children shouldn't
be free to walk the streets' knowing full well that he didn't kill people or abuse children, and that there is a difference between people and animals. I know they want to get their own back. Their job is to demonise a celebrity in order to keep their issue in the news, and someone's right to pay their debt to society and return to his previous life matters little. It is interesting that PETA haven't attacked Vick at all, but his doing public service ads for them might have something to do with that.The Second Chance Act was enacted by the George W Bush regime, who then failed to fund or enforce it. Obama wants to do something about a prison population that stands at 2.3 million, or almost 1 per 1,000 in America, and 38 per cent of them are black. Americans make up a full quarter of the world's incarcerated, although we are only one-twentieth of the world's population. Prison building and staffing is one of the few growth industries that can't be farmed out to cheaper countries. Yet.
I look at my dog Rufus and my stomach turns at the thought of what Vick did to his dogs, but so far he has done and said all the right things to make one think that his stay in prison did what it is supposed to do, punish, yes,
but help rehabilitate, like the new-look Vick we see on the right. The Tucker Carlsons of the world would be happier if the black population could be moved en masse behind bars, a kind of perverse domestic version of Liberia, and maybe the turkeys voting for Christmas who believe what they see on Fox is actually true could all get jobs guarding them. It would be a lot like the ante-bellum South, come to think of it, where the Obamas were quickly put in their place.Meanwhile, the Eagles lost on Tuesday night, giving NBC a big audience and the NFL a new idea for creating more nights of prime time football: watch the weather reports and move the games. Read my nfluk.com Friday Morning Tight End column on New Year's Eve for more on that...
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
WORLD SERVICE ALERT: THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
I'll be on BBC World Service's The Strand Thursday, 1530 GMT (and repeated I believe--as well as accessible via the net) to talk about the Swedish film version of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I saw it back in the fall, tune in and find out what John Landis said after the film!
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)