The ABC network mini-series, The Path to 9/11, begins tonight, despite weeks of controversy over whether it faithfully reflects Clinton-era counterterrorism efforts or purposely casts blame in a right-wing ploy to influence Congressional elections in November.

Controversy centers on scenes such as one depicting the Clinton administration's failure to approve the capture of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998. Conservatives extolling the film, such as actress Govindi Murty, giddily promote such scenes because they "honestly depict" the former president's "bungling." More sober reviewers, such as Reuters' Ray Richmond simply note that "it's agreed that this specific event never actually took place."

Hollywood, where artifice is the mother of apparent authenticity, has never been about honesty. No matter what they say: Director David Cunningham, in the promotional video Keeping it Honest, reveals that real life in Islamabad, Pakistan, is best portrayed when filmed in Tangiers, a North African city. Riots in Khartoum, Sudan? Honestly, they look more real in Morocco, where there are also plenty of acting extras for hire.

Amid the hype, one fact stands out: efforts to shape cooperative, non-partisan responses to global terrorism don't get nearly as much attention as the high drama of partisan bickering. Washington's heady joy in finding propaganda and conspiracies everywhere is matched by Hollywood's false innocence about the power of images to shape opinion.

What if filmmakers, policy makers and citizens put more time into pondering why American films can't be shot in Pakistan, or Sudan—where actual anti-American riots are much more likely to break out. We could take real steps toward creating a world that's truly safe, even for televised docudramas.