SUPPLEMLNTAL CLIPS: TUEStJ , .
:° , 18 OCTOBER 1983
WASHINGTON TIMES 18 October 1983
REEDIRVINE
ABC's
nuclear
horror
•
movie
BC is planning to air a hor-
A
ror movie on No\'. 20, a
horror movie with a mes-
sage. It is called "The Day
After," and it is a fictional account
of what would happen to Kansas
Cit,· if a nuclear war broke out and
a city in the heartland of America
were subjected to a Soviet nuclear
attack.
The movie is said to be a vi\'id
portrayal of the aftermath of such
an attack , including scenes of
destruction, burned bodies, \'ic-
tims of radiation, burns and bla!-t.
Nicholas Meyer, director of the
film , says it takes no political stand.
A spokesman for ABC says the film
has a message - that nuclear war
is horrible . That is a message that
hardly needs restating.
The question is why has ABC
spent so much money - one report ,
which ABC refuses to confirm or
deny, says it cost $7 million - on a
film that tells us what we already
know. The ABC spokesman also
refused to confirm or deny a press
report that as of the third week in
September the network had b~en
unable to sell single adverusmg
spot for the movie.
He did say, however, that ABC
considered the movie so important
that they would air it even if they
didn't sell any advertising to pay for
the time.
That suggests that ABC's enter-
tainment division is getting into the
not-for-profit message business.
This probably won't delight the
ABC shareholders, but it is
bringing joy to the hearts of the
advocates of a nuclear freeze and
other anti-nuke types on the eve of
the deployment of Pershing II and
cru ise missiles in Western Europe.
The perpetrators of the Korean
Air Lines massacre, the peace-
loving rulers of the Soviet Union,
have been busily stirring up dem-
onstrations against the deployment
3
Pg.lC
of the Pershing missiles in Europe
for many months.'They have found
thousands of people in Europe and
in this country who were suscept-
ible to the argument that we will
run a great risk of nuclear war if
we proceed with the plans to deploy
those missiles in Europe.
Strangely, these same people
didn't seem to notice when the
Soviet deployed their SS-20 mis-
siles aimed at Western Europe.
They seem to forget that the Per-
shings are NATO's answer to this
new Soviet threat.
Who can argue that nuclear war
is good? Who will not shudder at the
prospect of his country being dev-
astated by a nuclear attack'
One of the groups that has taken
the lead in the propaganda offen-
sive has been the Physicians for
Social Responsibility, which has
invited Soviet doctors to this coun-
try to help convince us of the hor-
rors of nuclear war. This
organization distributes a movie
called "The Last Epidemic," which
discusses the horrible conse-
quences of a nuclear conflict.
L\
Josh Baran and Diane Eagle, two
anti-nuclear activists associated
with a group called "Target Kansas
City," says ABC has handed the anti-
nuclear movement a wonderful
1
opportunity with its new mo,·ic,
"The Day After." Baran says that
the ABC movie is similar to "The
t·
Last Epidemic," but he points out
that it will reach many more peo-
ple.
Nuclear Times magazine quotes
him as saying, "The only way to
reach people is through television.
The time and money spent to make
this film would take the entire
peace movement's budget of $20
million. We have to take ad\·antage
of the free time ." Baran estimates
that a single showing of the ABC
movie will reach 10 or 20 times as
many people as would ever see
"The Last Epidemic."
An ABC spokesman denied any
knowledge of the enthusiasm
expressed by the anti-nuclear
types over the ABC movie. Can it be
that they are really unaware that
the pro-freeze movement is plan-
ning \'igils and marches in associ-
at ion with the showing of the film?
Nuclear Times says the
anti-nuclear groups are planning
"to turn a television commercial
event into an educational event on
our own terms."
But it won't be a commercial
event if the advertisers refuse to C)
shell out the money to pay for it.
Reed Irvine is the chairman cf
the board of Accuracy in Media .