theguardian.com
Zero Day": De Niro Investigates Cyberattack in Fictional Trump Second Term
In Netflix's "Zero Day", Robert De Niro plays ex-President George Mullen, who is called out of retirement to investigate a large-scale cyberattack that cripples the US during a fictional second Trump term, mirroring current political anxieties and highlighting the need for strong, trustworthy leadership.
- How does the character of President Mullen, played by Robert De Niro, compare to real-life figures, and what does the show suggest about the qualities needed in political leadership during times of crisis?
- Zero Day" uses the backdrop of a crippling cyberattack to explore themes of political instability and the erosion of trust in government. The show's plot, featuring a former president brought back to solve a national crisis, reflects anxieties about leadership and national security in a turbulent political climate. De Niro's role underscores the longing for a traditional figure of integrity amidst chaos.
- What are the immediate consequences and broader implications of the cyberattack depicted in "Zero Day", and how does the show's portrayal reflect current anxieties about national security and political leadership?
- Robert De Niro stars in Netflix's "Zero Day", a political thriller set during a fictional second Trump term, portraying ex-president George Mullen investigating a cyberattack. The show highlights political unrest, including street mobs and far-right media figures, mirroring current events. De Niro's character is presented as a trustworthy, old-school public servant.
- Given Robert De Niro's own political outspokenness and the restrictions placed on his interview, what does "Zero Day" reveal about the relationship between art, politics, and the challenges of free expression in the contemporary United States?
- The show's production, described by De Niro as akin to "doing three features at once," suggests the complexity of portraying contemporary political anxieties through a fictional narrative. The show's focus on a former president's struggle to navigate a crisis hints at concerns about the resilience and adaptability of American institutions. The constraints placed on the interview about political discussions highlight the pressures and self-censorship affecting public discourse.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames De Niro's silence on Trump as a significant event, highlighting his past outspokenness to emphasize the current constraint. The headline and focus on the interview's limitations shape the narrative towards a concern about free speech and political discourse in the US, potentially impacting reader perception of De Niro's actions and the current political climate.
Language Bias
The article uses emotionally charged language like "dogged and courageous," "disgust and loathing," and "visceral level." While colorful, these words could be replaced with more neutral terms like "determined and persistent," "strong disapproval," and "intense feeling." The description of Trump's actions as "cuts and firings; the repurposing of the federal government" implies negative intent, while neutral language could describe this more objectively. The use of "car-crash interview" also presents a subjective opinion.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of De Niro's potential motivations for not speaking out against Trump beyond contractual obligations. It also lacks alternative perspectives on the current political climate in the US, relying heavily on De Niro's viewpoint and the implication of unprecedented political instability under Trump. The article doesn't explore the potential for self-censorship among other public figures.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by implying that either De Niro is contractually obligated to silence or he has chosen self-censorship. It overlooks the possibility of other factors influencing his decision, such as personal safety concerns or a strategic shift in his approach to public commentary.
Sustainable Development Goals
The show depicts a cyberattack on the US infrastructure, highlighting the importance of strong institutions and effective responses to national security threats. The character of President Mullen, while flawed, represents a commitment to truth and doing the right thing, reflecting a desire for just and effective governance. The article also discusses the chilling effect on free speech and public criticism, indirectly impacting the ability of institutions to be held accountable.