PDA

View Full Version : Ventre: O.J. isn't the problem ... we are



thedrifter
11-20-06, 05:26 PM
Ventre: O.J. isn't the problem ... we are
Our sick society lets ex-murder suspect profit obscenely from alleged crimes
OPINION
By Michael Ventre
Updated: 7:24 p.m. CT Nov 15, 2006

I should start off by saying that I believe O.J. Simpson is a murderer. And not just any kind of murderer, mind you, not the “convenience store robbery gone awry” type or the “heat of passion” variety. No, I believe his crimes, although fueled by jealousy and hatred, involved a great deal of premeditation that places them in a special category of the most heinous acts committed by humans against other humans.

I believe he butchered Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman in cold blood, and I also believe he feels no remorse whatsoever about it.

I’m entitled to this belief. I followed the criminal trial closely, as did millions of others around the world. I was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt — way beyond — that the evidence against him was overwhelming. I believe he was found not guilty because the jurors in that case were suckers who swallowed a smooth line of defense by the late Johnnie Cochran and his extremely high-priced team of attorneys.

Without going into too much detail, suffice to say the police and prosecution produced just enough rope — the revelation of Detective Mark Fuhrmann’s use of the “N” word, which he had denied using, Christopher Darden’s blunder in making Simpson try on the glove, just to name two memorable examples — to hang themselves in the minds of a gullible group of jurors looking for any reason to let a celebrity off the hook.

In 1997, another jury found Simpson liable in a wrongful death suit filed by Goldman’s family. That was some indication that the justice system hadn’t gone completely haywire.

The killings happened in 1994. And now, more than 12 years later, rather than recede from memory, the travesty of Simpson walking free has reached its nadir, thanks to Fox and book publisher Judith Regan.

But it isn’t just the Simpson situation that has hit rock bottom. Our current culture can also claim that dubious honor.

Simpson has a book coming out later this month called “If I Did It,” which “hypothetically” describes how the murders would have been committed. The book is being published by Regan.

To preview the book, Fox will air a two-part interview called “O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened.” In essence, it’s Simpson’s confession without officially confessing.

He has a free pass now. He should be rotting in a box for the rest of his life, but he isn’t. He should turn over every last dime to Fred Goldman, but he won’t, because there’s no way to make him do that.

Instead, he’s free to flout his status as a celebrity who got over on the system. He can thumb his nose at his detractors and say, “Sure I killed those people — hypothetically. (Wink, wink). So what?”

He can satisfy his need for money, and his sick craving for notoriety, with this sham of a book and this abomination of an interview. That’s expected. He is who he is.

But has our society degenerated to the point where potentially millions of viewers and readers are more than eager to act as his accomplices?

I understand full well that there is almost no decency anymore. We have only the recent elections to show that certain people — on both sides of the fence — are willing to stoop to anything to get what they want. We have reality TV shows that revel in the misery of others. We have corporate executives quick to plunder the retirement accounts of their workers in order to feather their own opulent nests.

But the Simpson phenomenon is in a nefarious league of its own. The fascination over his deeds should have expired long ago. Yet as long as there are entities out there who will do absolutely anything short of televised executions to rake in revenue, scalawags like Simpson will continue to have a forum as well as a means to profit from their misdeeds.

A friend of mine and I have discussed the term “sociopath.” She applies it to someone who has done something terrible and has no conscience about it. But I looked it up and that’s slightly inaccurate.

A sociopath, according to my dictionary, is “a person whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.” That doesn’t sum up Simpson completely.

I believe the appropriate term is the much more acute “psychopath.” That is, again according to my dictionary, “an individual who manifests amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships, extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc.”

Using those definitions, Simpson qualifies as a psychopath, especially when applying the terms “amoral and antisocial behavior” and “extreme egocentricity.” And by exploiting his reprehensible efforts to try and make more money off two murders, Fox and Regan come dangerously close to fitting the definition as sociopaths.

Let’s talk about politics just for a moment, without specifying parties, recent elections or future campaigns. If hypothetically, at any point in our history, there are crooks in power, and voters keep those crooks in power, then the onus shifts from the crooks to the people who keep them in office. Generally speaking, voters get the government they deserve.

The same holds true for a lot of things in life, including television. If you keep watching garbage, they’ll keep feeding you more garbage. If you tune in to listen to O.J. Simpson casually discuss “If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened” or if you purchase his book, then you are tacitly condoning what he did.

Viewers have watched murderers discuss their crimes on TV before, but in almost all those cases the killers had been brought to justice and were behind bars and/or about to be executed. There is a morbid fascination with such individuals because it provides a portal into the darkest recesses of human nature, and as disturbing as such spectacles may be, there is at least some educational value in it.

That isn’t what this is. This is Simpson getting away with murder and then profiting from it.

It’s not about him anymore. It’s about you.

Ellie

thedrifter
11-20-06, 05:28 PM
With O.J. cancellation, Fox shows rare sanity
‘If I Did It’ gets replaced by network’s new motto ‘It Isn’t Worth It’
COMMENTARY
By Michael Ventre
MSNBC contributor
Updated: 6:08 p.m. CT Nov 20, 2006

Finally, sanity reigns. Decency gets CPR. Integrity staggers to its feet.

And the power of the people is reasserted.

On Monday, News Corp announced it would cancel its television interview and book with O.J. Simpson. “If I Did It” was replaced with “It Isn’t Worth It.”

That only happened, of course, after an insurrection took place, a popular uprising in which angry citizens not only voiced their displeasure, but flexed their economic muscles. Viewers reportedly were organizing boycotts of the sponsors of the scheduled television interview, in which Simpson would discuss how he would have committed the murders of his ex-wife Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman if he had done it.

Granted, just about everyone involved believes he did it, so this was simply going to be an interview with someone who got away with murder and was gloating about it for profit. It was about as disgusting a spectacle as had ever been prepared for the public airwaves.

News Corp, which owns Fox and ReganBooks, the book’s publisher, knew all of this ahead of time and went forward anyway. O.J. Simpson committed these slayings in 1994, so it wasn’t as thought Rupert Murdoch’s empire was blindsided. It should take full blame for nurturing this travesty.

It’s tempting to say that News Corp. ultimately did the right thing by putting the kibosh on this garbage. But it never would have happened if Fox and publisher Judith Regan hadn’t gone way too far and crossed a line in a society that is becoming colder, meaner and less compassionate by the day. By doing so, they infuriated the very people they were hoping to make money off of.

Anything for ratings
The TV interview was all set for November sweeps. After all, if you’re going to try and capitalize on the brutal murders of two innocent people, what better time to do it than sweeps? Fox knew what it was doing.

It never gave a second thought to the relatives of Nicole Simpson, who had to endure another horrific reminder that the callous killer who left their children without a mother is still free and still looking for new ways to capitalize on his notoriety. It never considered the Goldman family, whose beloved son was taken from them suddenly and who won a judgment from Simpson in a civil case that it is having great difficult collecting even though Simpson seems to have no shortage of wicked endeavors with which to cash in.

No, Fox killed these projects because of the bottom line, not despite it.

Said Murdoch in a statement: “I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project. We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson.”

I guess Rupert feels better late than never.

About a dozen Fox affiliates reportedly refused to air the interview. If Murdoch and his associates failed to see the red flags before, then this was the clearest sign yet. And it wasn’t because a few station managers felt queasy about Simpson talking in detail about how he would have killed the two people he actually killed.

Their response was the direct result of grass-roots reaction by the decision-makers who really matter.

Sometimes it takes a while for mainstream Americans to react when injustices are taking place. Usually it’s because the average person out there works hard, takes care of family and has a limited time in which to participate in activism.

But when something is as wrong as this was, even the most apathetic couch potato is likely to rise up and cry out.

There is something about the Simpson case that hits home with most people. For one thing, lots of Americans sat through the trial and formed opinions during it. Also, they’ve observed Simpson’s behavior afterward. If he’s out there looking for the real killers, he’s taking his sweet time. If he’s grieving for Nicole and sad for Ron, he has an incredibly strange way of showing it.

Also, he’s a celebrity. Since Simpson was acquitted in 1995, the public has seen a steady stream of stars and professional athletes get preferential treatment in scrapes with the law because they can hire the best lawyers while regular folks get the shaft. The inequities in the justice system were always quietly understood, but that case hooked them up to amplifiers.

That’s why few wanted to see Simpson selling himself on TV and in book stores, and for Fox and ReganBooks to act as facilitators. It was too despicable even for them.

There is one downside to the cancellation. If Simpson did make money, there was a chance Fred Goldman could finally collect some of the $33 million he has coming to him from the civil suit. But that might have been a longshot. Simpson and his cronies have been adept at shielding his income. He’s almost as good at evading Goldman’s lawyers as he was tacklers in the NFL. Maybe even better.

But in terms of perpetuating a gross indecency, this is one time that Simpson was successfully thrown for a loss, and by the very opponents who once adored him: average Americans. There are just some people you can’t elude, no matter how shifty you might think you are.

Michael Ventre is a frequent contributor to MSNBC.com. He lives in Los Angeles

Ellie