Why Aaron Sorkin left Trump out of ‘The Social Reckoning’

Por Daniel Miller — POLITICO – TOP Stories

LOS ANGELES — Aaron Sorkin says “The Social Reckoning” “shouldn’t” be a political film.

But he acknowledges that it is one, probing Facebook’s role in the rise of extremism and division ahead of the 2020 presidential election and the subsequent Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. The movie, which Sony Pictures will release Oct. 9, is already drawing attention for its portrayal of one of the world’s biggest tech companies at a time when the industry is under intense scrutiny.

Directed by Sorkin from his own script, the film centers on the partnership between journalist Jeff Horwitz and Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen. Her leak of internal documents to the then-Wall Street Journal reporter led to a series of stories that examined, in part, what Facebook knew about the harmful effects of its platforms.

A Facebook executive said in 2021 that the series “contained deliberate mischaracterizations,” and a spokesperson for Facebook parent Meta said in 2022 that the social media network was not responsible for the violence on Jan. 6, instead noting that Donald Trump promoted a false narrative about the election being “stolen.” On Tuesday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other tech executives were scheduled to meet with the president at the White House to discuss AI.

POLITICO spoke with Sorkin, creator and showrunner of “The West Wing” and writer of 2010’s “The Social Network,” about returning to the topic of Facebook, the timing of the movie’s release before the midterms, and why he decided to not include any mention of Trump in the film.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

This film is arriving as the public has grown more skeptical of tech. It’s a different climate from when “The Social Network” came out. Was that shift part of what motivated you to revisit Facebook? 

Really, the motivating factor was that a great story came along. I’ve been asked really any time Facebook or Meta had done something that was in the news — Cambridge Analytica, etc. — if I wanted to revisit it. And there just wasn’t a story that I felt was a movie until I started talking to Frances Haugen and Jeff Horwitz. The fact that the film has coincided with what tech people would call an inflection point is just happenstance.

Another upcoming film focused on a tech company and its founder — “Artificial,” about OpenAI’s Sam Altman — was recently dropped by Amazon, which announced a multibillion-dollar partnership with the AI company while the movie was in post-production. Did you worry about the fate of your film when that happened?

I was nervous when I saw that. We were either in the middle of shooting — or certainly in the middle of post — when Amazon punted Luca [Guadagnino]’s movie, which I understand tested very well. There was every reason for them to release the movie. And I got nervous: you know, holy cow, does Sony in Tokyo really care about releasing this movie? Wouldn’t the easiest thing be to not? And I was very impressed with [Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group CEO] Tom Rothman’s fortitude.

Despite covering political events, I noticed that the name Donald Trump is not said in this film, most notably in the context of the January 6 Capitol riot. Could you tell me about that decision?

I’m not going to deny, of course, that the movie is political. I just think it shouldn’t be. There’s really no reason for it to be. I wasn’t given a directive by the studio. I delivered the script and I think the next day I was in Tom Rothman’s office, and unsolicited, I told him that in that sequence we wouldn’t see any Trump signage at all. We won’t even see red hats. We’re going to see “Don’t Tread on Me,” “Stop the Steal.” You see American flags, Confederate flags, but it won’t be about MAGA versus everybody else, or even red-blue. It’s just going to be about Facebook’s role in the rise of divisiveness, extremism, and hyperpartisanship. So it was my choice.

Was it because that just could become a distraction?

Because it would become a distraction. I felt like as soon as we got to that scene, as soon as you saw anything “Trump,” it would just become about something else. Again, I realize it’s going to kind of become about that “something else” anyway. But I just like to have clean hands.

This movie is coming out about a month before the midterm elections. Do you think it could become part of the public discourse leading up to the vote?

I’m not deluded. I don’t think this movie can change the course of electoral history. But these midterms are why I didn’t want to wait a year to make the movie. I didn’t want the movie to come out after the midterms because I didn’t think we’d be in the mood for it anymore. And yeah, I thought maybe one little reminder might be helpful.

Have you talked about how you feel about the Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery merger?

Listen, I don’t think it’s good that there are fewer movie studios. That’s all there is to it. And I actually have a special place in my heart for Warner Bros. Not only have I done a lot of work there, but my father, his entire career — he was a lawyer — was spent working at Warner Bros. But that’s a silly reason to have a problem with it. The good reason to have a problem with it is that the consolidation of these movie studios is bad, and I’m not sure about the new leadership.

Does the coziness of the combined studio’s new leadership with the Trump administration — Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison has, for example, hosted a dinner in honor of the president — give you pause?

Sure it does. This movie, “The Social Reckoning” — would it have been made by the new Warner Bros. leadership? I doubt it.

Fonte: POLITICO – TOP Stories