In 2014 it is very common to see shows about political corruption such as Scandal and House of Cards. However, it was not the first. In 1939 a director named Frank Capra directed a film called Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. It was one of the first political comedies of its time. The film illustrated political corruption specifically in Congress, which had never been done before. The film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington was made in 1939, but Franco's portrayal of America has similarities to today's society. Franco portrays several factors of America. One thing he often portrays is the American government. It shows that politicians only care about themselves and base their decisions on what will benefit them. This is shown throughout the film, particularly at the beginning, when Hopper, the governor of an unknown state, must choose a new United States senator. Hopper flips a coin to choose between Jim Taylor and Henry Hill. Instead it ended up in a newspaper with an article about Jefferson Smith. He then realized that Smith would be easier to influence and vote his way. That hasn't changed at all in America. In 2014, politicians still choose people who will support them and who have the same beliefs. The only difference is that today most Americans know more about politics and if they nominate someone who is not qualified, the public expresses their opinions. Another thing Franco describes about America in 1939 is that anything can happen, anyone can succeed. This is demonstrated when Smith becomes a senator. The odds were stacked against him, but Smith believed he could be a good senator and he succeeded. Throughout the film other politicians try to take advantage of him, but he remained strong and did what was... middle of paper... a habit. Corruption in politics happens often and will continue to happen. The media plays an important role in politics. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington illustrates this. In the film the newspaper was controlled by Taylor and his political machine. Because of this, the newspaper wrote negative things about Smith and tarnished his reputation in Washington. He was frustrated because the paper made it look like a joke and people in Washington believed it. This also affects the passage of his bill in the Senate. Saunders decided that Smith should call for a filibuster by talking about the bill and trying to influence the votes. The reporter was not accurate in his description of the filibuster because he thinks it simply blocks a vote. Saunders wasn't entirely accurate because he talks about passage in the Senate but it must also pass through the House of Representatives.