Is it possible for a movie to function as a basic ideological / propaganda mechanism for an outrage campaign of the intensity and extent of 2020, 2021 and 2022? Is it possible to “work” as literature-for-mass-use, even reaching the point of being used as a “reference” for some first-class, world-class and smelly health minister?
We know that cinema has been used as a mass, propagandistic medium almost from its beginning. However, the “cine prediction”, that is to say that a film directed and illustrated almost exactly what eventually happened, is unusual.
The movie Contagion is the case (for us). Directed by Steven Soderbergh, with a commercially good cast (Matt Damon, Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, Lawrence Fishburne, etc.), it was released in American theaters at the end of 2011 as a health-themed disaster thriller. Against the pessimistic predictions of “experts,” it did quite well in the following weeks, “making” twice its production cost; it was also screened in Europe, certainly in England, Spain, and Italy. And as happens in such cases, it closed its theatrical run in about a month and a half, at the beginning of 2012. Since then, it concerned only (or mainly) fans of the “disaster thriller” genre.
However, starting in early January 2020, with news of a “deadly pandemic somewhere in China,” Contagion was “resurrected”—and skyrocketed! According to MUSO (a company that tracks illegal online viewings), the film had 546 views on January 7, 2020, and had reached 30,418 by January 30 of the same month. February and March 2020 would see even more exponential growth, quickly making it the #2 movie (again, in terms of illegal viewings). In other words, during the time that the sanitization fear campaign was being constructed, “public discourse” (i.e., demagoguery) around COVID-19 was being woven, and the first mass fear-mongering carpet bombings were taking place, Contagion had not only entered the minds of hundreds of thousands of laypeople, but had almost entirely shaped the narrative of deadly threat / salvation.
the key points of the plot – and its basic idea
Returning to Chicago from a public relations trip to Hong Kong, a CEO unknowingly carries a deadly virus that spreads through the air/respiratory system as well as through touch. She falls ill and dies, but in the meantime the rapid spread of the virus has already begun simultaneously in the US, China, and throughout the developed world (East and West). While the American CDC takes on the “medical” aspect of dealing with the “crisis” (the virus has been named MEV-1…), the military and the CIA take on the “political/social” aspect, as the rapid spread of infection leads to orders for mass quarantines, restrictions on movement in and out of cities, and outbreaks of looting. Meanwhile, a blogger claims that he contracted and recovered using a homeopathic remedy; and that the government along with its “experts” are hiding it. He is the “conspiracy theorist” of the film, with particular influence.
The goal (of all) is the development of a vaccine… After several failed attempts (while the deadly infection continues to spread…) such a vaccine is created, and its gradual distribution to the population begins… All’s well that ends well: at the closing of the film it is revealed that it was a bat virus, which infected through a banana that fell from the mouth of a bat into a pig at a farm; from this a cook was infected (through contact with the meat), and from the cook the CEO was infected (through a handshake).
What is particularly significant in the film, especially when viewed after the hygiene hysteria, is that it – a 2011 derivative, let’s remember – includes almost ALL the elements of the real hysteria campaign 8 or 9 years BEFORE the practical “unfolding” of the latter!
To begin with, it includes the idea of “patient 0”: (rather hastily) in the case of covid-19, such was considered (in Europe) a CEO from Hong Kong…
But this may be secondary compared to all the rest.
The journalism / demagogy is there… The maps and diagrams are there… The virus “reproduction rate” (R0) is there… The “necessity of censorship” (against conspiracy theorists) is there… The accusations of anti-scientific and irrational behavior are there… The schools that close are there… There are no (yet, we are only at 2011…) virtuous companies (only altruistic researchers), but the most important thing exists: salvation through vaccination in the midst of an extensive infection!
Everything is so “correct” in its place in Contagion that a contemporary viewer might wonder to what extent the crafting of the actual hygiene terror campaign copied the movie’s script, or to what extent this script was prophetic—due to foresight! The first seems to have happened, although we cannot prove it. The second not even by a long shot!
The main screenwriter (Scott Burns) undertook intensive tutoring, first with retired epidemiologist Lawrence Brilliant, then with university pathologist Walter Ian Lipkin, and ultimately with specialists from the WHO: essentially, what was shaped into the core narrative elements of Contagion were the few things that had happened and the many things that had not happened in the two previous (failed) attempts at hygiene terror campaigns, first with the “bird flu” in 2004, and later with the “swine flu” in 2009. Essentially, therefore, the 2011 script was already the skeleton of the WHO’s “line” (and its bosses’). What had not yet happened (in 2010 and 2011) was the acquisition / privatization of the WHO (and its “line”) by the “great philanthropists” and the pharmaceutical cartels1.
The strategic issue in which Contagion played a key role as a “mass educator” (always based on the already then “line” of the WHO…) was salvation through vaccination while the “villain” virus had already spread to a large extent! From a purely scientific / immunological point of view, the value of vaccines (of real vaccines, let us emphasize…) was prevention; not ex post protection; and in no case on an individual scale, but on the scale of the population.
Vaccination of populations or parts thereof (children’s vaccines) is done before there is an appearance and, mainly, spread of a pathogenic organism… not after. Why? Because mass vaccination historically aimed to develop herd immunity (“herd immunity” to be accurate with the technical terms) against a pathogen BEFORE it appears, in order to prevent its reproduction / spread / circulation. This is the key issue against potential mass infections: to prevent the reproduction / spread / circulation of the pathogenic factor in an immunological way.
Conversely, when a pathogen has spread sufficiently within a given population, what the “vaccine” does is to act as an antidote (thus causing confusion between infection and poisoning, two completely different conditions!) while the only thing it can actually achieve is “immune pressure” against the pathogen, significantly enhancing the prevalence of mutations that escape artificial (and ex post) immunity: for pathogens, we are not individuals; we are a host species…
The above are not scientific secrets. They are common, social experience, given that the history of mass, childhood vaccinations covers most of the 20th century. Vaccination against diphtheria or tetanus WAS NOT / IS NOT done in part during a diphtheria or tetanus epidemic! Practically, for countless generations, no one has seen such cases. Even intuitively, prevention through mass vaccination had nothing to do with either antidotes against obvious danger or with healing / treatment.
Perhaps it was not entirely understood that the preventiveness of mass vaccination, the fact that one or the other pathogen does not appear (and certainly does not reproduce and does not circulate) concerned herd immunity. Perhaps it was not entirely understood (or over time, with the “progress” of neoliberalism and the establishment of Capital Self, it was lost) that the crowd, the community, is not simply the sum, the addition of the individuals / members of it. The certain thing is that the Contagion scenario does not simply present a distorted idea of what a vaccination is (and what it serves); it sets this idea upon the already entrenched individualism – in this case, against the threat of (deadly) infection.
The affirmation of individualism runs through the entire scenario, and culminates with the “discovery” of the distribution of the salvation vaccines: because the produced quantities are limited, regular “lotteries” are held, each time revealing a date. Those who have birthdays on that date receive their dose… The rest wait (locked in their homes) for the next draw.
This is not a secondary point of “salvation.” Indeed, according to the scenario, no one (from the crowd, society) questions it. It is rather a shaping of a) salvation as a gift (birthday), and b) the individuality that (must) characterize the management of salvation. In 2011, this was auspicious and socially just: a distorted, molecular, atomized, neoliberal notion of “social responsibility” was shaped as a stoic waiting for the lottery’s outcome. After a decade, in 2020 and 2021, the exact same privatized perception of “social responsibility” in the face of a “health threat” had conceded not to the lottery, but to the state the absolute right to determine what is social and what is not.
Consequently, in Contagion there are two strategically significant ideas, interconnected, which from the beginning of 2020 will become strategic norms of capitalist/state intellectual, moral and emotional control of populations. First, that “technology hunts” pathogens within their mass-distributed hazardousness (whether real or imaginary is another matter), an idea borrowed from the “anti-terrorism” of a decade, the “terrorist sleeper cells”, etc. And since this can do nothing but reproduce (through intended or random mutations) contamination and morbidity, technology will be, must be everywhere present, with its new models (“vaccines”, genetic engineering, “therapies”), according to the model of continuous “upgrading” of computer operations. And secondly, that in order to achieve this, the privatized idea of the social, of collective interest, must be definitively adopted, leaving superior authorities to collect as tactics (their) privacy and individualism, in order to create a replica of the so-called “social responsibility”. Essentially, this is the model of public order transferred to public health: discipline, loyalty, and corresponding reward or punishment.
Various scenes in Contagion shape this individual “social responsibility”, although in ways that in 2020 and 2021 could be considered attractive yet somewhat primitive. “Salvation” (i.e. the vaccine) is a gift. Either of the altruism of a techno-scientist, or of the generosity of the CDC chief, or (still) of the integrity of a provincial who is a “health hostage” in a Chinese village. In 2011, the ideal way to narrate the “elixir of salvation” was the individual epic. So that the audience of 2020 and 2021 would recognize through its voluntary education in these meanings, in a handful of personalities, either of the state (“priests”) or of pharmaceutical mafias, the ideal of the 110% “altruist”, guardian of the public interest; who has a “mission” (and no economic interest!!!). Pure “social responsibility”, which obviously should be adopted by every subordinate individually, even in the most extreme versions of individualism:
From the ban on hugs and kisses (american version):
…to the ultimate house arrest (german version) as “proof of social responsibility”:
Although in the past there have been other disaster films on similar themes (a “major health threat”), it was Contagion that proved so accurate in relation to what happened/was imposed from the beginning of 2020 onwards, that it is certain that the mass “study” of viewers on this particular film, even before the tactics and biopolitical strategy of the authorities began to unfold in practice, served as the ideal “intravenous” dose of fears and obedience.
This fact was by no means coincidentally highlighted appropriately by the institutional mechanisms, already from the beginning of March (2020):
How random was this?
The production and financing of the film
Contagion is a production of Participant Media. Its owner (through a foundation bearing his name) is the Canadian of Jewish descent Jeffry Skoll: his name may not mean anything to us, but he was the main shareholder and president of eBay. He sold his shares in 2001, and… entered the great family of western philanthropist billionaires! At just 36 years old.
The well-known Forbes estimated his fortune in April 2020 at 5.1 billion dollars. The film production company Participant Media is only one part of his “interests”; their propaganda arm. In an interview with the establishment Guardian in November 2013, when Contagion had made its round, he was still 6 whole years away from his political apotheosis, and was simply one among several other successful productions of his (: Syriana, An Inconvenient Truth, Fast Food Nation, Lincoln, The Fifth Estate), and not even the top one among them, Skoll explained:
… When I started Participant, I felt that the film industry had a gap for a company that would deal with major issues in a systematic way… I was surprised that no one had thought of it before me. But for most people, entertainment is a kind of escape from reality. My goal was to harness the power of cinema and its impact to promote important messages. Of course, such films should always offer entertainment so that people want to watch them. But I wanted to make sure they have a message, a hint at a serious issue…
Skoll created Participant Media in 2004. Five years earlier, in 1999, he had established the “maternal” foundation of his philanthropy, the Skoll Foundation. “Skoll Foundation”… The official rationale of the “foundation” was (as stated on its official site):
…to be a catalyst for social change, so that a sustainable world of peace and prosperity for all can be created, through the investments, connections and pioneering of social entrepreneurs and other innovators of societies, who find solutions to the world’s problems….
Touchingly generous is the goal of the Skoll Foundation, with the broad, wide and bold emphasis that such “philanthropic foundations”, according to American legislation, are not taxed, neither the foundations themselves nor the donations to them.
In any case, the (tax-exempt) Skoll Foundation (the foundation, that is) and its arm, the (tax-exempt) Skoll Fund, the financial scheme, managed as of April 2020 (according to Forbes) “assets” of 1.2 billion dollars. Which means that the American “third sector” philanthropy was doing just fine.
In 1999, the foundation was created, the base of the business enterprises. In 2004, the cinematic arm was established, with the purpose of “raising awareness” among the public. In the same year, the highly experienced Western capitalist Skoll founded the Capricorn Investment Group, a purely “investment” entity, investing in stocks of various companies, with the purpose (what else?) of “sustainable development” and saving the planet…. And in 2008, he created the Skoll Global Threats Fund, yet another funding company, to address global threats. According to the company’s “about” section, these threats were: climate change, pandemics, water scarcity, nuclear proliferation… and the Middle East2.
In 2011, Contagion was released – another film in line with the visions of a wealthy (cosmopolitan) philanthropist.
Someone suspicious might think: “whoa, we’re dealing with a conspiracy here!” Narrow-minded view. Skoll (like many others) has invested (within or outside quoted companies) in Changing the Capitalist Model, in the 4th industrial revolution, understanding that it needs (beyond the millions and billions of equity capital) also the push of social relations and perceptions so that the transition has the maximum possible social acceptance, not just passive but active support.
The Capricorn Investment Group (with only 9 employees…) holds shares in 96 companies, in “new technologies” (from alternative energy production methods to artificial intelligence) and the “social economy” (from philanthropy companies to…). The business “philosophy” behind this portfolio is that if not all, many of these will have increased profitability (“high returns”) in the course of capitalist restructuring. In the interview with the Guardian we mentioned earlier, from 2013, there is this characteristic paragraph:
…So multi-millionaires and billionaires should pay more taxes, as Warren Buffet believes? Skoll supports that those who have been lucky enough to accumulate great wealth have the obligation to give something back to society. “If everyone were philanthropists, like Bill Gates, Pierre Omidyar or Warren Buffet, people wouldn’t need to be taxed in order to do the right thing. But in the absence of a strong force that makes people contribute, I believe that those who have should pay at least their fair share and perhaps a bit more. It is in everyone’s interest”…
He is not a tax evader, if that’s what you’re thinking. He is a “benefactor.” With the added dimension, without a doubt, that profitable “benefactions” are preferred. From his successful career in e-commerce (eBay), Skoll learned that in the 21st century, shaping (“sensitization” as it is elegantly called, meaning the creation of emotions…) public opinion (through their education on threats and salvific interventions, appropriately shaped puzzles and their solutions, blurred as they should be: Syriana…) is not simply a business venture in itself, but also the key to the success of many other businesses in the New Capitalist Model. Hence his involvement in film production of “educational movies.”
end titles – or beginnings
Skoll knows Gates and Gates knows Skoll. They belong to the club of billionaire philanthropists and have collaborated (as “benefactors”) in some cases. For example, the Bill & Melinda Foundation had funded with the (modest by its cubic standards) amount of 2 million dollars the promotion of Participant’s documentary “Superman”, concerning the failure of the American educational system. However, we have no evidence of Skoll’s involvement (through his funds) in the health industry. In any case, the historians “of the great health threats” support that Skoll indicated the risk of pandemic bird flu as early as 2009 (entirely symptomatically: with the “swine flu”), six years before Gates’ famous TED talk in April 2015, titled “The next pandemic? We’re not ready”. Obviously, Gates had better public (and corporate) relations.
Nobody goes unnoticed though. Thus, while in 2020 Mr. Basil, the Lord of Doors and Windows, was pulling with his characteristic necrophilic manner towards impending mass deaths unless “vaccines” save the planet, the protagonists of Contagion were called upon to serve a simpler duty: to update, as experienced consultants, the movie’s scenario as the “decalogue of responsible conduct”!
The idea/proposal came from Columbia’s medical school. Six “educational” videos3 were produced, which admittedly did not have the viewership of the film, but in any case it was a “well-intentioned effort”.
Although there was no shortage of all kinds of people from all kinds of spectacles who were paid as “shapers of public opinion” to support the health scare campaign, the stars of Contagion started from a different position: they had – played – the – very – role! For an audience already living in fictional conditions, their advice was not particularly needed; their role alone was enough.
The peak of praise for Contagion ultimately came from where no one expected: from the unprecedented health minister of the government of Her Majesty the Queen of England (etc.) Matt Hancock4. Before being forced to resign, he stated in early February 2021 that the film inspired him regarding what should be avoided in the distribution of “vaccines.”
Contagion is not going to be found in the curriculum of any medical school. It has been overtaken by reality—not that of contamination, but that of the restructuring operation carried out under its banner, and of the internecine coup (on the part of the bioinformatics-insurance complex). It was, however, the staged trailer for the “survival guidelines” already envisaged at the time it was made, almost a decade before their shock-and-awe application. This may have gone beyond the intentions of the film’s creators, but not those of its financier/producer. Mr. “benevolent” Skoll knows, regardless of whether he admits it or not, what all similar overlords know. That is to say, the transition to the norms of the 4th industrial revolution cannot happen, cannot be achieved, step by step.
It requires leaps – and for these to occur, strong kicks are needed…
Ziggy Stardust
- The large consortium of companies behind Bill Gates’ “philanthropic foundation” began to systematically engage in “saving the planet’s health” from 2010, initially spending a few years looking for where (its) investments would be more effective, and where the “center” worth conquering was located. It is obvious that the opportunities (missed at the time) offered by the spectacle of “swine flu” in 2009 were duly analyzed by those responsible for industrial “philanthropy.” This is especially true since the “foundation” had already been a shareholder in the pharmaceutical companies Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Pfizer since 2002. At the end of 2013, the “foundation” acquired its first chief executive officer, Susan Desmond-Hellmann, coming directly from the biotechnology industry, and more specifically from Genentech (where she was responsible for “product development”). A little earlier, in 2009, Genentech had been acquired by Roche. ↩︎
- In 2017, this particular creation of Skoll came to an end, and from 2018 it was transformed into two other similar sensitive and philanthropic projects, Ending Pandemics and Climate Advocacy Lab. As for its interest in the Middle East? Humanitarian, of course… ↩︎
- Accessible, starting with the first one, here. ↩︎
- Hancock, a fanatic supporter of the strictest social distancing measures, was “caught” by an internal camera in May 2021 making out with his lover in his office, violating the measures that were still in strict effect – for others, of course…
He was forced to resign shortly after. ↩︎