Michael Moore censored

[Security]

A fair and proper decision? Or is Michael Moore simply sabre rattling? He's had these problems before with US companies failing to fund and/or distribute his work:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...lm/3689121.stm

Fahrenheit 911 attacks the President's actions before and after the 11 September terror attacks and links Mr Bush with powerful families in Saudi Arabia, including that of Osama Bin Laden.
The film was due to be distributed by Miramax, a division of Disney.

But Disney "officially decided to prohibit" Miramax from distributing the film, the director said.

Moore, who won an Oscar for Bowling for Columbine in 2003, questioned whether in a "free and open society" Disney should be making such a decision.


Moore said Disney was "afraid of losing millions of tax breaks in penance for angering [state governor] Jeb Bush in Florida, where Disney have a lot of their investment".

"I have never seen a grosser example of what's wrong when just a few corporations own the media."

[Iain Gill]

Moore doesn't need to rattle any sabres, the point is he needs the general American populace to see this film, as most Americans have no idea about the links between the Bush family and the Bin Laden family. And whilst this information has been out in the press for many years, as has been proven by the recent Iraqi abuse scandals, nothing is really noticed until it's seen in black-and-white so to speak.

He has no such problems distributing the film in Europe and the rest of world. An oxymoron, if we are to assume that the US stands for freedom, while the rest of world can see the film being distributed for the mass-market.

[Belson17]

I agree they should distribute the film. The problem is most people who go to see Moore's crap are very uninformed and take what he says as fact. They don't know that much of his stuff is cut and edited to prove any point he wants no matter how untrue.

[brian]

Too true - it seems that Moore has become a mirror of the very propaganda extremism he claims to be fighting.

[palefrost]

Originally Posted by Belson17

I agree they should distribute the film. The problem is most people who go to see Moore's crap are very uninformed and take what he says as fact. They don't know that much of his stuff is cut and edited to prove any point he wants no matter how untrue.

Totally agree. No one voice should ever be stopped from expressing their opinion but they need to label such films appropriately. His film was not a documentary to me it was propaganda and it had a agenda to it. I hear he is working on another piece now about the FDA. I cant wait to see that one.

[Plumley]

Both, I think. Michael Moore is a showman and he knows what it takes to bring attention to his work. He's not above making a bigger fuss than a situation requires. On the other hand, I think he's right about this being a decision that's politically driven.

[vicki2]

What I think was funny is the recent made for tv movie that Clinton so objected to ...I ended up watching it, and didn't see what all the controversy was about. It was a movie! Moore tends to put his work under the guise of documentaries which throws people off.