Raw Data: One Step Too Far

Thoughts and observations for Newsroom episode 2-06 "One Step Too Far"

Written by Aaron Sorkin

Directed by Julian Farino who directed two epic Michael-Jan episodes on The Office, "Back from Vacation" and "The Deposition" and also directed a documentary on psychopaths which sounds a lot like a specific chapter focusing on Broadmoor Hospital in Jon Ronson's The Psychopath Test

• Our gumshoe journalists nicely re-cap the case for Sarin for the Red Team/audience
• Jim is immediately skeptical, as is Don
• Weirdly, the gumshoes get defensive about the case, which seems counterproductive.  The whole point of the Red Team is to poke holes in the case set forth and see where they can tighten it, or expose weaknesses.  It is not necessarily to get approval for the case, as it is 100 percent
• The whole meeting seems poorly structured and not likely to be productive in aiding the investigation
• Dennis Bandana even flies off the handle, attacking the ethics of the Red Team, and re-framing the case in the context of questions that have nothing to do with the case as it is presented
• Jim has a skype conversation with his girlfriend that would obviously be annoying to nearby co-workers
• Something about Hallie being surprised at it working is obviously a commentary from Sorkin about how women are idiots about technology. Why does he obviously hate half the planet and have his male characters make zero mistakes?
• They discuss plans which, because we are still in the first act, will obviously be ruined
• Will didactically points out the hypocrisy in how the GOP brings up faith when it's convenient. 
• Mac can't drive, and everyone goes crazy 
• Maggie, who takes up two spaces of street parking when she could allow another car to fit in there, has a rare valid point on Jim when she tells him she kept Genoa a secret from him for months.  
• Jim has a counter point in that she was not (extra) messed up at that time and her drinking is degenerating, so past behavior is more predictive of how future behavior will get worse, not stay the same.
• Did they bring the funny?
• These are more about the delivery than the text:
• "Naahhhhh" - Sloane
•  "It was regular negligence" - Mac
• "Cool" - Neil
• "You're confusing me with a hobo" - Will
• Drunk Aubrey accurately representing a drunk girl
• Tips on acting drunk
• Step 1: Practice
• The episode takes place during March Madness, which is late March 2012, but we're given a specific date of March 21, 2012 later in the episode. 
• General Stan poses the question why is it different for the "collateral damage" to be killed by chemical weapons, or other weapons, which brings to mind Obama's "red line" with Syria as to why is is worse for them to kill people with chemical weapons as opposed to regular genocide/mass murder
• General Stan has some sort of Jed Bartlet-like quality
• "You were a good spokesman for him" (emphasis added) is a backhanded compliment from Jim if there ever was one
• This show could have a vignette each week and post it to the Web site, "Conversations with Don"
• The music at the bar seems familiar but can't make it out enough to place it
• Don was at Newsweek in 2005
• Thanks Mike Isikoff!
• This is the Newseum related item I was hoping for a few episodes back
• After reading Top of the Morning, I look at the morning show with new interest
• The book also noted Savannah Guthrie's dancing skills, which Sloane highlighted
• There is a surprising dearth of clips showing this
•  Will has to sit and talk with this idiot Steve Doocy guy who Charlie yelled at in the first season
• Will talks about likeability, which may reference his Q score.  Top of the Morning makes particular note of Matt Lauer's Q score and plummet thereof following the Anne Curry nonsense
• Of course Denny Bandana is the only one in the room for the interview, making him and General Stan the only ones who know what is actually said after he alters the raw footage
• The show is taking pains to show that while the rest of the crew is skeptical and proceeding cautiously, Mr. Bandana dead set on broadcasting this story come hell or highwater.  I only wish Charlie and Mac were raising more substantive questions about the reporting rather than gritting their teeth to show how uncomfortable they are about it
• Based on how well last week's episode subverted expectations, I hope this storyline has a similar treatment because each beat has followed perfectly in step, somewhat exacerbated by the knowledge the audience has from the flashforward

What people will be upset about
Besides the supposed misogynistic attitude implying that only women make mistakes with anything ever, I imagine some will take issue with the Tailwind (not Tailspin*) story which for the first time is made the central plot to an episode.  "That's now how it happened!" will say the journalists who take no issue with artistic license on a cop or lawyer or doctor show, but suddenly become keenly aware of realism when their industry is subject matter of television drama.  Despite the central ideas for this storying ripped straight from the headlines it will somehow not be believable.  All the usual arguments for drama versus documentary apply here.  If there's an issue to discuss with the storyline, it's the predictability thus far and not the realism.  Why care about plotting and such instead of realism?

Because it's a fictional television show.
 
* OH-E-OH! 

And just as Sorkin put in Maggie mis-editing the Zimmerman tape, he flaunts another huge journalistic mistake, the Quran flushing.  I am admittedly a bit colored, seeing Isikoff speak on a panel with Matthew Cooper and some other journalists (David Corn maybe?) a few months after the incident *, because Isikoff did not seem particularly remorseful for his part in what happened. On Charlie Rose he gave the passive "it was terrible what happened" fake apology but avoids taking any responsibility. 

* And around the time of the Valerie Plame nonsense