Ray Richmond contributes to Deadline’s TV coverage.
Creator and exec producer Aaron Sorkin gave a rough layout of how the forthcoming second season of his polarizing HBO cable news drama The Newsroom will play out in terms of covering real-life stories. He told an SRO crowd at PaleyFest 2013 in Beverly Hills tonight that Season 2 will pick up a week after where Season 1 ends and ticked off the topics he’s tackling on the fictional Atlantis Cable News (ACN): “The Tea Party/American Taliban, the General Election including the primaries and conventions, Trayvon Martin, the Affordable Care Act, and drones.” He said he’s still unsure whether the Newtown school shootings will be included when the show returns with fresh episodes in June. “That’s a tough thing to write about without minimizing or exploiting it or spreading Cheez Whiz around it. It’s a profoundly important moment, and the last thing you want to do is handle it poorly.” Sorkin explained the show “would simply stop our narrative before” it took place. Sorkin also maintained tonight that he doesn’t want Season 2 to polarize viewers or critics as much. “I hope some of the critics who weren’t happy with the first season will take a look at the second and maybe reassess their opinion,” he said. “But no one has ever won a fight with a television critic, and I doubt that I’ll be the first one.” Executive producer Alan Poul added that part of the problem critics and viewers may have with The Newsroom is that it’s in fact entertainment. “Some people get confused,” he said. “It looks and sounds like news. The set feels like news. So people think we’re re-creating the news. But we’re not.”
Sorkin also was joined onstage by star Jeff Daniels (Will McAvoy), Sam Waterston (Charlie Skinner), Emily Mortimer (MacKenzie McHale), John Gallagher, Jr. (Jim Harper), Alison Pill (Maggie Jordan), Thomas Sadoski (Don Keefer), Olivia Munn (Sloan Sabbith) and Dev Patel (Neal Sampat). One plot point that was all but confirmed will have Don (Sadoski) and Sloan (Munn) hooking up during the season.
With CNN’s Piers Morgan moderating, there was plenty of talk about the role of journalists. But when Morgan
praised CNN’s recent highly rated but widely panned coverage of the Carnival cruise ship, Sorkin wondered why that much attention couldn’t be paid to sequester cuts. The crowd applauded. Morgan shot back that there’s no way it “could be made sexy”. Morgan asked Pill about working with both Woody Allen and Sorkin and who was the better writer. Hemming and hawing, she said, “It isn’t that Woody doesn’t have a vision. It’s just that, if you don’t get it, you’re not going to – and Aaron is so about making his vision contagious.”
Related: ‘The Walking Dead’ At PaleyFest
Related: PaleyFest 2013: Accelerating ‘Revolution’


NEWSROOM was only polarizing because a bunch of Breitbart-led wingnuts who hadn’t seen it automatically condemned it because of their detestation of Sorkin and Fonda, plus their perception that it was based on Keith Olbermann. Once it actually aired and people began seeing it and realizing it wasn’t a left-wing hatchet job, much of the hatred dribbled away.
Umm, NEWSROOM is polarizing because it posits that the Tea Party is the “American Taliban,” when anyone that has paid attention to current events for at least five minutes a day knows that the Tea Party platform has no social issues attached. None. Oh, and they’re non-violent, non-extreme and believe in equality for everyone. In other words, they are the exact opposite of the Taliban.
And NEWSROOM viewers are too uninformed to comprehend that the show is a complete hatchet job against the right, as was its design by Sorkin. He knows the power that he wields as a showrunner/creator/writer. The factual inaccuracies and near slanderous story lines have helped shape the public opinion of a lazy generation. Do you know how many times I have heard that ridiculous monologue about America not being the greatest country in the earth espoused by idiot 20-somethings that try to pass it off as their own. 3 times. And each time was as clumsy as season 1.
This show regardless of its political leanings has provoked extensive conversation and research in my house with my two 20 something children. For that, I have to say its one of our favorites. Both of my children were informed, enthusiastic voters in the last Presidential election because of this show. Remember it’s premise is entertainment, so if you’re not entertained or find it too difficult to keep an open mind, turn the channel and watch something else.
The professional television critics who poured derision on The Newsroom are not right-wingers, and I doubt many US TV critics even vote Republican. The preachiness, the silly love triangles, the depiction of supposedly highly-competent professional women as ditzy twits, and the fundamental unbelievability of a Republican media personality spending all his time bashing Republicans to his right while never, ever saying a bad word about the Democrat in the White House — for these reasons, The Newsroom incurred the critics’ wrath.
Exactly. Sorkin seems to pretend every criticism is a coded attack on the show’s politics, when actually it’s just a badly written show.
Sorkin is an unabashed, virulent, far-left dramatist who is proud of his politics and makes no effort to hide his intentions or the distortions of liberalism in everything he writes. Even his screenplays reek with the stench of that same left-coast elitism and arrogant detachment from the workaday truths of normal humans. There is no need for me as a reasoned and intelligent TV viewer to taste the same supply of bias he poured into “The West Wing–” the smug sense of superiority and phoniness that turned audiences’ stomachs and eventually drove it off the air. HBO is on a crusade of leftism in many of its productions now and will soon learn the lesson of other networks: Liberalism is poison to the audience.
Yes, THE WEST WING was a bitter failure for Sorkin, having only been on the air for a pathetic seven seasons. Boy, his face must still be red when he thinks of that crushing embarrassment.
For the record, “the far left” is not synonymous with “far to YOUR left.”
Don’t watch, then.
Really, no one makes you.
Um, no. He’s polarizing for a lot of reasons.
For me it’s Sorkin’s female characters. All of them written as after-the-fact throw-away trash (much like his real life). On the surface they seem to be “tough, independent women”, but when you delve deeper, they’re one-dimensional, not saying anything important and act like imbeciles.
Not an authentic cord in any of it.
So the truth of the matter is you just don’t like Sorkin. Why not just say so and change the channel. But..don’t villify intelligent viewers that enjoy the celebration of language…and that’s what he does best; creates dialogue that is stimulating..that begs for debate..and finally..that entertains!!!
Let me guess, the show’s handling of these events will make all Republicans and conservatives look bad and all the liberal journalists bashing them look like heroes. I love Sorkin’s writing, but the first season of NEWSROOM could not have been more tilted politically.
Nobody with an honest, functioning brain is buying the Tea Party being primarily responsible for all of Washington’s woes. Enough already. Thank GOD there won’t be a gun control episode.
The Republicans and conservatives are making themselves look bad with no help from Sorkin whatsoever.
And the Tea Party is indeed “primarily responsible” for Washiington’s woes. Congressional Repubs kowtow to those racist maniacs a.k.a. American Taliban instead of compromising with the Executive, which is what they were sent to Washington to do in the first place, for fear of being primaried by somebody even MORE to the right.
They are holding up Jobs and Farm bills that can help their own constituents.
They are holding up the Secretary of Defense’s nomination in a TIME OF WAR.
They are acting like they didn’t lose the election.
The sequester is on them and the American people know it.
Moderate Repubs are being purged, either by primary vote or retirement.
Aaron Sorkin couldn’t make any of that shit up in his wildest coke-smoking binge days.
When Republicans and conservatives (same thing) act like heroes, maybe they’ll be portrayed as such?
Just a thought.
It’s entertainment
Of course, one could say, as you did….
“…Nobody with an honest, functioning brain is buying..” entertainment like Rush L, Ann C., Sean H,, and other entertainers.” but…nah, let ‘em do their schtick. Some folks are amused.
It’s interesting that he chooses to write about stories that happened already. I tapped out on the show at the second to last episode of season 1. I won’t be coming back.
You’re obviously missing the point of the show.
Looking forward to season 2. Emily Mortimer and Jeff Daniels are both fantastic in this. Mackenzie is one of the best written roles on TV.
C’mon. Come on! This has to be a put-on, right? That character is an absolute embarrassment, from her ridiculous name to her ridiculous background (English accent but supposedly a super-patriotic American in love with all of America’s Americanness…what? Why not just make her English if she can’t do an American accent?) to her appalling stalker attitude towards Will and her worship of his inferred-but-never-demonstrated brilliance and greatness. ugh. She just seems to be Aaron Sorkin rewriting some of his own breakups in his favor this time.
If you don’t think there are women like that out there, incredibly, amazingly efficient and stellar at their jobs, but absolutely stupid about personal relationships, guess again. As an independent women, I can’t stand women like that when they do the woman thing and bat their eyelashes in an effort to elicit pity. It’s degrading, but it’s part of real life. Beautiful women, no matter how smart they are, will always use their looks to get what they want in life. Those that focus more on their jobs than their looks tend to not have the social skills to compensate or balance.
As far as the “American Taliban”, you clearly haven’t met the people in far right-wing America. They are not very well educated, usually racist and have the maturity of a 2-year old. I can say this, since I moved to a non-metropolitan city in Florida full of them. They exist and they have no ethical problems cutting your brake line so they can boost their own ego.
Intelligent people watch Sorkin because the level of English used on TV today is abysmal. Others watch it because they’re sick and tired of a government owned by the wealthy and it’s about time someone had the cajones to call it what it is.
Jon Stewart ragged on CNN for giving titles to main news stories. This last news cycle with the fertilizer plant fire and Marathon explosions they led with only “BREAKING NEWS” as the title. Sure Jon is entertainment, but one can only hope the same “entertainment” can make our government elected officials take a good look in the mirror and make some changes.
You missed the parts where Piers made his usual ass of himself by making the evening all about him instead of the show, and the audience questions far outstripped Morgan’s for relevance and interest. I swear, any so-called journalist who trots out the “How do you feel…” question should be fired on the spot.
Here’s the real skinny as to why Season 1 of the Newsroom is by far the most hate-watched program in the history of television. Fact number one, Aaron Sorkin thought he can teach a thing or two about how to cover the news, when the hard real is based on supply and demand. Second, proselytizing viewers into thinking that if it’s not hard news its’ not news at all is by far the most pretentious thing I’ve ever heard in my entire life. Its no wonder that more and more people would rather learn more about Kim and Kanye’s love life, what’s going on with Honey Boo-Boo, buy wristbands for a cancer-striken news anchor and know about a manhunt in the Los Angeles area, than to know about the sequestration cuts. Simply put, NO one likes to be lectured about how the news is supposed to be, and the Newsroom is very much that. Period.
Okay, yes, the “American Taliban” thing is risible, really embarrassing to Sorkin et al, but to focus on that or on the broader politics of the show misses the main point:
Scene to scene, sentence to sentence, the writing is awkward and the performances as stilted. It may be a ham-fisted polemic, but that doesn’t matter as much as the fact that it’s badly made TV.
So many Sorkin-haters. Here’s a thought: if you don’t like Newsroom (or other shows for that matter), don’t watch it anymore. If you do like it, then continue to watch it.
Was that so hard?
Except we deserve better because Aaron Sorkin is better than that. We want him at his best. With someone of his ability, should we just go ‘oh well, it’s good enough even if it does make me cringe from time to time’? He doesn’t believe in settling for mediocre or pretty good television. If we push for great television, he’s on our side so lay off. The very premise of his show doesn’t support the idea that we should turn a blind eye to something that could be great if we only fought for it.
I can’t stomach him anymore. Sanctimonious doesn’t even begin to describe Sorkin. Sorry. I know he’s got an amazing skill set, but write one character that I believe and maybe I could sit through an hour –
How come there are so many comments about the news and the politics in this show when they are clearly elements cleverly subjected to poetic licence? This was billed as a romantic comedy drama. I suggest that you all protest too much –if you can write something better then do so. Some of us think it is brilliantly written and acted entertainment – yes ENTERTAINMENT!
And how can this show not have got an award ?- it is clearly head and shoulders above other dramas on TV last year.
A comment from one who has NOT seen the West Wing
Awards are politics, and the winners are not chosen to be the best or most interesting nominees, but those whose win will offend the smallest number of people. If you’re touching on delicate issues like that, it doesn’t really matter whether you’re doing a good job at producing a quality show or not. If you’re in it for the awards, don’t get near the hot topics, I think pretty much sums it up.
I can live with the criticism concerning the writing. I find the show very entertaining myself, but will concede that most characters are far from deep or believable, and I too rolled my eyes when the “clumsy woman” theme began to be so overplayed. Message-wise, however, I can not tolerate the criticism. While it may seem left-leaning on the surface, if you sort of watch it but not really watch it, the ultimate message was never one of a specific political group or viewpoint. The bias, if you can call it that, was always on the side of returning to actual politics, where those people actually do what they’re paid to do: represent their electorate and discuss the actual topics and problems at hand, rather than a politically-corrected variant on the “No, your mother stinks, and my daddy is a policeman!” back-and-forth we remember from our sandbox days.
Seems Sorkin has struck a nerve, such a high degree of bile in these comments, and so personalized. Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite didn’t pander to mindless pap. Sorkin challenges us to reject entertainment and opinion under the guise of news. Hats off to Aaron Sorkin, a brilliant, talented, visionary.
The Newsroom is a unique cable tv show. All the actors are great and guest star Jane Fonda should be a regular as she adds to the
drama of network and behind the scenes newsroom activites.