Today, Nikki Finke posted this TIME article about The Wire’s writers and their current and newly-published policy about the Drug War.
I find it relevant that their little show, “admittedly a small shard of the TV universe” has such an invested following! The article makes the suggestion that their audience, their viewers, look to them, the writers, for meaningful, relevant advice about what to do about this giant, important social problem. I think it means that if you write about significant subject matter, the audience will expect you to have a significant prescription for their actions!
Caveat venditor.
Let the seller beware: the audience is looking for substance!
Gillian Fritzsche 
I admire their stance, and the ‘war on drugs’ has been lost for a decade, but this is idiotic:
“if asked to serve on a jury deliberating a violation of state or federal drug laws, we will vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence presented”.
So, a repeat offender sells crack to 10-year-olds, and they’d vote for his acquittal? They’re grand-standing for their cause, and it lessens their message.
Interesting. Doesn’t this starkly contrast the Hollywood fallback postion, when someone accuses them of negatively influencing society, that what they produce is merely entertainment and has no connection to real time/life actions of their viewers?