Collateral Damage in State of Play

Collateral damage. That’s how Rep. Stephen Collins refers to the civilians killed in the name of war in State of Play. Unfortunately the real collateral damage in this film is journalism’s ethics. Conflicts of interest, obstruction of justice, gathering information under false pretenses, and scare tactics are all issues raised by Russel Crowe’s character, Cal McAfferty- journalist for the Washington Globe.

credits: IMDB

This film, released in 2009, follows the trail of McAfferty as he tracks the killer of four people in the streets of Washington, DC. Unfortunately that path leads him to the doorstep of his former college roommate, Collins (played by Ben Affleck). From the moment this connection is made fellow journalists gravitate to McAfferty for inside information and access to its biggest player. While he shuns their questions, he is digging for a story of his own.

In McAfferty’s efforts to protect the reputation of his friend and a major public figure, he crosses more lines than he toes. Not only does McAfferty begin to craft a story to take the spotlight off of Collins, but he drags colleague Della Frye (Rachel McAdams) down a dangerous trail. Giving in to his methods of gathering information, she lies to potential sources regarding her intentions of speaking to them.

This film takes on the task of examining how far one should go to get a story. While it’s debatable, the Globe’s withholding of evidence from the police may very well have cost two people their lives. Had the killer been apprehended earlier in the case, he may not have killed the witness to his first murder nor would the police have needed to use lethal force to save McAfferty’s life. Conflicts of interest are everywhere in all the personal relationships intertwined in this story and they lead McAfferty to the wrong conclusion. He thinks he is ahead of the story when his bias has actually caused him to almost miss the real man pulling the strings.

The Society of Professional Journalists calls on each reporter to always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. This is one of the major errors in McAfferty and Frye’s reporting. It never occurs to them what Collins’ motives or stakes may be in this case. Because they begin their search for answers with the goal of clearing the Congressman’s name they fail to consider he may be behind all the problems.

The film is slow to begin as it sets up the relationships, but takes off once the scandals begin to develop. While it is entertaining and reveals twists in the story only at the last possible moment, it does have collateral damage. A viewer can be left with an even larger distrust for the media and journalists themselves. Too many rules are broken to justify the outcome of this story. Pressure does not mean an editor should overlook illegal taping or allow them to leave a reporter on a case when the conflicts of interest are so glaring.

How far do you think one should go in the name of justice? How far does one have to go before collateral damage becomes a primary target?