Quote:
Originally posted by Probono
Let me try some rational answers
CBS is has a news organization that did not do their due diligence on the paperwork that used to substanciate their claims. The interesting fact is the essence of their report was correct according to those interviewed. Someone did provide phoney documents and they, not the content of the report became the issue. Still it was an objective report based on how they saw the facts at the time.
Michael Moore has actually requested Sony allow him to release F911 for TV viewing before the election. If they do, which I doubt, it would hurt both his revenue and theirs. I doubt the anyone would be ordered to show it without commercials.
The Reagan movie that I believe was to be aired on CBS was pulled because of Republican complaints.
In essence follow the money in all cases. The media in this country was once owned by many different interests it is consolidating. CNN was once liberal, now it is part of Time Warner. NBC was once liberal now is ownerd by General Electric. Radio stations used to be locally owned now most are owned by Clear Channel. No one has more interest in Bush being relected than those who were rewarded by his new corporate tax cut that just made it out of the Senate today. Special interests know where their bread and butter comes from.
|
Awesome answers. Follow the Money is always a good tactic when dealing with assholes no doubt. Your comments on Reagan shut me up as I had stupidly forgotten that showtime picked it up. I think it was silly for the righties to sue to stop it airing in the same way that I think its silly for the lefties to sue here. (everyone who thinks sue is about money: please look it up)
I suppose my gripe with Moore and this whole situation is that I think his movies are tripe. The claims he makes dont stand up to close inspection, and the complaint made in MMHA, that he OVER simplifies things in spite of evidence that the world is not simple, is valid. When you add the fact that he didnt choose television or the internet as his primary distrobution method, then pissed off sony execs by telling people to pirate it confuses me. If he wanted nothing more than for his film to get out, couldnt he have released it on the internet to begin with? Perhaps with a donation model? Lastly I would like to direct people to
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com Its decidedly right leaning but has some valid arguments.
really. I'm not leaning any more towards Kerry at this point though I see YOUR point clearly