Hollywood is a Comedy in International Relations

There has been a lot of talk in the press recently about the hacking of Sony's network, with many different reactions.  It appears that forces originating in North Korea were able to breech Sony's network, and steal massive amounts of data.  This potentially valuable or embarrassing data is being held hostage, with the threat of publicizing it if they don't cancel the release of a movie that is very offensive to the North Korean government.  The movie is rumored to graphically depict the assassination of Kim Jong Un, the country's dictator.  There was also a public threat of physical violence against the company and its employees if demands were not met.

After weeks of debate, and a progressive series of data leaks, Sony has canceled the release of The Interview, the movie in question.  This has resulted in further widespread criticism of Sony, which has been mounting as the leaks revealed issues within the company and its leaders.  Now in as much as canceling the movie is caving to terrorist demands, and encouraging attacks like this in the future, I oppose their decision.

But many people are bringing the freedom of speech into the situation, as an issue at stake.  And I think that is the wrong approach, and not really relevant anyway.  The principle of freedom of speech (and/or "expression") applies to government intervention, and nothing else.  The government has not required Sony to cancel the movie, at least not publicly, so their freedom or rights have not been violated, at least not by the government.  They have clearly been violated in some form by the attack, but their "rights" have not been.  And just because we have the right to do something doesn't mean that it is right to do it.

Now let's look at it from the other side.  Someone in North Korea deserves a huge promotion at this point.  Not because what they did was right, but because it was seemingly impossible.  Early on, I found it hard to believe that North Korea could be to blame for this, because I didn't think they were that competent and capable.  Most of what I hear about North Korea supports the idea that the country is led by people who live in their own deluded fantasy world, with no grip on reality.  I could easily imagine Kim Jong Un demanding that his military put a stop to this movie by force.  I could not imagine them ever coming close to succeeding at that task.  But it appears that they have, against all odds.  The North Korean government tried to settle the issue peacefully, lodging an official protest with the UN, which was totally ignored.  So they moved on to more extreme measures.  Now regardless of the means they used, let's look at their objective.  Would we allow a movie to be released that portrayed the assassination of Obama?  I can assure you that we would not, and there are actual rules about that, enforced by the secret service.  We have movies about assassination attempts, against fictionally US Presidents, but the assassins are never the protagonists, and we would never graphically portray their potential success.  So I think the North Koreans have justification for being upset about the movie itself.

So should it be released?  We can ignore the freedom of speech argument, because even in the US, the freedom of speech does not extend to advocating killing political leaders.  And a movie production in the US would be shut down by the government if it was about killing the current president.  And while North Korea seemed like a safe and politically correct target for a comedy spy movie, it is not the same as using a fictional enemy.  And actually portraying the killing of a real political leader, who is still alive today, as a desirable outcome, is clearly inappropriate.  So do the filmmakers have the "right" to do something like that?  Possibly under existing US law, but not if it was a US President.  Is it the right thing to do?  Surely not, but it is outrageous enough to garner more attention and therefore more profit.

So not showing the movie might be the right thing to do.  The issue is that they are making that expensive decision for the wrong reasons.  They are canceling the movie to avoid being liable for the consequences of showing it, not because it is an inappropriate thing to show.  It is unfortunate that the current outcome promotes hacking and terrorism as a viable way of accomplishing legitimate objectives in the future.  And the responses from both the media and the public to that decision just illustrate how out of balance their values and priorities are.  They are almost as out of touch with reality as the North Koreans are usually portrayed as being.