The controversy behind the film—even more than its message—became the focus of the media coverage that followed Obsession’s distribution, both in print and online. So did, as a result, the organization behind it. Clarion Fund is a not-for-profit founded in Delaware in 2006 to distribute films like Obsession. Its founder, Raphael Shore, produced Obsession and also served as director of Aish HaTorah, an international charity founded in Jerusalem that provides Jewish education and is a staunch defender of Israel. (Aish HaTorah says it wasn’t involved in the film, however.) Obsession’s executive producer was credited as Peter Miers, but Shore told the Israeli daily Ha’aretz that Miers is an alias for a Canadian-American businessman. Ross, Clarion’s spokesman, wouldn’t identify its donors, media strategists, or vendors. Its tax return isn’t due until after the election. So one month after the film’s distribution, we still don’t know, specifically, who was behind Obsession.
To the extent that it’s engaging in transparency, Clarion Fund didn’t dispute that it concentrated its distribution of Obsession on political swing states like Ohio, but says it was trying to attract attention, not votes. “We chose areas where the press is congregated at the moment,” Ross says. “If we sent it to Hawaii and Maine, it would be under the radar.” Ross noted that the film was made in 2006 and doesn’t mention either candidate or political party. The group’s refusal to disclose its funding sources, however, isn’t reassuring. The Council of American Islamic Relations asked the Federal Elections Commission to investigate—since, as a 501(c)(3) charity, Clarion Fund is prohibited from influencing elections.
This wasn’t the first time that advertising caused so much trouble for newspapers. It was an ad that led to the landmark 1964 Supreme Court freedom of the press ruling in The New York Times v. Sullivan, which set the “actual malice” libel standard, allowing free and aggressive reporting of public officials to flourish. The case stemmed from an ad that claimed Alabama officials had engaged in a “wave of terror” against civil rights activists. In the case of Obsession’s distribution,” newspapers had left themselves open to charges that they had been used in a backdoor attempt to influence the presidential election by stoking fears about another wave of terror.
There’s no disputing that Obsession was inflammatory. But a deeper question went unanswered in all the controversy that resulted from the film: Was its message true? Were we, as a nation, ignoring the grave threat from radical Islam? Some readers thought so; others saw the film as a slick piece of propaganda. Newspapers left it up to subscribers to decide, and that abdication allowed Clarion Fund to bypass the editorial department and access customers directly. Small wonder there were so many hurt feelings.
Shortly after the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel distributed Obsession, publisher Betsy Brenner told the city’s press club that, in light of the negative reaction the film provoked from readers, she probably wouldn’t distribute it again. Still, in many ways, Obsession was a missed opportunity for newspapers. The film provided an opportunity to engage the community, to foster dialogue, and above all, to educate readers on the question of terrorism—an opportunity that got lost in the controversy surrounding it. Perhaps the Clarion Fund was being more innovative in its thinking about the role of newspapers than the papers themselves.
- 1
- 2




I hadn't heard the full story, and don't live in a swing state.
Posted by Joshua Simeon Narins on Tue 21 Oct 2008 at 07:14 PM
I currently live in the Northern Virginia area I actually received this Obsession DVD in the mail the other day. I figured one of my friends sent it to me as a goof but I went to my parents house the next day and found not only had they received the same DVD but so did their next door neighbor.
Posted by chris on Wed 22 Oct 2008 at 09:47 AM
Ohhh .. another cabal of Jews strikes from the “shadows” on the peace loving and non-violent muslim community again! And during an election year when they are also coordinating the spreading lies about “The One” being a muslim …. God damn them! Luckily we have guys like Seth here who are willing to speak truth to power and go running to CAIR, no doubt the demographic who found the movie to be a “slick piece of propaganda”, for the official reaction from the muslim community.
Posted by Carl Stevens on Wed 22 Oct 2008 at 01:14 PM
I am both intrigued and disturbed by this article. First, has the writer actually viewed the DVD? If not, don't you think he/she should? Second, it seems to be propaganda, but, if so, is it certain, as implied, that it is a plot to discredit Obama? Many who support Obama, also find Islamic terrorism a serious issue for the new administration. While conventional pundits proclaim anti-terror as the Republican strength, does this film imply that the Democratic candidate is "soft" on terrorism? if not, what is the problem? Does it hint that Obama is unpatrioutic? If not, what's the problem? Does it smear all of Islam. According to the article, it clearly states that it concerns Islamic jihadi terrorism, not Islam. If so, what is the beef. I, for one, would like to see the film. As for propaganda, Al Gore's film on global warming was, frankly, propaganda. Should we seriously argue that it maligns the energy industry of America? Until I see the film, I won't be able to determine whether it was legitimate or not.
Posted by JS on Wed 22 Oct 2008 at 07:26 PM
Thats a great point JS.
Seth, did you even watch this or did you just obediently regurgitate the talking points provided to you by CAIR?
Posted by Carl Stevens on Wed 22 Oct 2008 at 09:18 PM
Thanks for reading the article and your comments. The film is available on YouTube in 10 parts. I'm interested in your reaction to it, as well as whether you think newspapers should have distributed it.
Posted by Seth Hettena on Thu 23 Oct 2008 at 12:59 PM
I saw it, and in light of what has been going on in the past 10 years, I thought it was boty accurate and timely. Its not up to me whether or not the papers should have distributed, but I am glad they chose to do so.
The question is, did you watch Obsession, and do you think that the papers should have distributed it?
Posted by Carl Stevens on Thu 23 Oct 2008 at 05:01 PM
Yes, I did watch the video. If I were publisher, would I would have distributed "Obsession"? Yes, and I would defend Clarion Fund's right to do so. But I also think newspapers needed to do more than lob it onto the front porch. "Obsession" presents a point of view. Our understanding of a vitally important subject like terrorism should stand in the light of free and fearless questioning, and not be based on fear and supposition. I feel that a better forum for that kind of examination was the newspaper that "Obsession" came wrapped in.
Posted by Seth Hettena on Thu 23 Oct 2008 at 06:53 PM
yeah reader should watch dvd first. content of the movie is totally true and the movie was being produced in 2005 to educate people more about terrorism. and HonestReporting had copyrights of the movie not ClarianFund. for 3 years they screened the movie on their website and a lot of major campuses. and people who wacthed the movie did not react negatively, they started to think about more about terrorism and HonestReporting make people know about Jihad war. that is the war between religiouns most of the westerns doesnt have any clue. three years later ClarianFund founded and they used the movie as a political weapon. they think that people may start thinking about national security. and one of the best way to make voters worry less about the economy and more about national security would be sent out a DVD that opens with clips of 9/11 and includes of thousands of Muslims chanting “Death to America”. Many political analyst say that, the the distrubution of the Obsession DVD was designed to benefit a particular presential candidate namely Senetor John McCain. The issue which polls show that John McCain ahead of Obama is national security.
Posted by NoName on Tue 6 Jan 2009 at 03:12 PM
If you want to get detailed information about it exams with guaranteed materials, then you must use the internet. From internet, you can get different types of knowledge and information according to your requirements. I really enjoy all your posts that you have posted in this blog. I don't see such a nice and amazing blog like this. Thanks a lot for doing this great effort. Well Done.
Posted by Martin on Sat 15 Aug 2009 at 08:02 AM