Michael Moore's View or the Highway?

[MAJOR_Baker]

Interesting quote from MM......my favorite subject >

"A significant portion of the proceeds of Fahrenheit 9/11 will go toward convincing every thinking American to turn off the Fox News Channel. This will be my contribution to making America a better place. I hope they enjoy this year, their last year with actual viewers." â ” Michael Moore 

So why does MM think he should decide what people should see and hear?  Is it only okay for people of his political persuasion to shape public opinion?  It seems to me that as most politicians he believe that his view is the only one with all of the answers sort of like the Soviet Union's Meida apparatus........... IMHO I think he would love to ban FOX news by saying it doesn't have enough CDN content

 

[48Highlander]

It's pretty obvious that he thinks his view is the only valid one, and that people shouldn't listen to any contradictory opinions.  However, I don't think that even he is egotistical enough to seriously beleive that he'll be able to noticably decrease the FOX networks viewer numbers.  Is he?

 

[Pikache]

You never know... There's enough silly people out there who actually think this fat piece of junk is worth listening to.

 

[dann0]

I understand what you are saying.  
I have also noticed though, that FOX NEWS doesn't have a great track record when it comes to honesty.


"In the lawsuit filed in 1998, Akre claimed she was wrongfully terminated for threatening to blow the whistle to the FCC. After a five-week trial that ended August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that she was indeed fired for threatening report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy cows.

In overturning the jury on what amounts to a legal technicality, the court did not dispute the heart of Akre's
claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers.  

Nonetheless, the station aired a report in wake of the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by the verdict."

"In essence, the news organization owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to even lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves."

http://organicconsumers.org/rbgh/akre022103.cfm


I believe Moore's motivation behind that statement is to get Americans to look at other sources of information.   Sources with content not so easily swayed by the whims of large corporations.
 

 

[jrhume]

Heh, heh.  I think Moore's motivation is simply that he dislikes Fox.

As for news sources unswayed by large corporations -- they no longer exist -- not in the mainstream media anyway.

 

[dann0]

BINGO!

 

[Brad Sallows]

An enterprise doomed to failure, since thinking Americans don't pay attention to Michael Moore.

 

[Smoothbore]

Americans would be best off listening to neither the extreme left (MM) nor the far right. Both sides are seriously full of it.

 

[Farmboy]

There is only one cure for MM

  :mg:

http://www.fototime.com/D9A06556D4226FE/conv.wmv

 

[nbk]

http://brain-terminal.com/video/michael-moore/

Check out the video in that link. It is a short interview with Moore from a Conservative website.

It is biased of course, but dont forget, there are two sides to every story. Its very easy to sit around with like minded individuals and criticize everything someone does, without hearing about anything they have to say.

 

[jrhume]

Well, Major, Fox IS far right if you're a liberal who believes CNN, MSNBC and the NYT provide fair and balanced coverage.

It all depends on where you're standing.  From my viewpoint as a self-described center-left conservative, Fox looks just a bit to the right of center. 

 

[jrhume]

nbk,

Get serious, man!  There are plenty of valid viewpoints from a liberal worldview, but MM doesn't represent such a 'side' as you call it.  The man is a self-serving elitist who has found a way to make lots of money.  He's interested in nothing but Micheal Moore.  Sheesh!  I'd still be a Democrat if the party hadn't been taken over by radicals pretty much like MM.

 

[tabernac]

Heh, heh.  I think Moore's motivation is simply that he dislikes Fox.

As for news sources unswayed by large corporations -- they no longer exist -- not in the mainstream media anyway.

Whatever floats his boat. :

And yes this, :gunner: is a good idea.

 

[30 for 30]

Come on guys, American media is full of arrogant, loud-mouthed, right wing windbags, so a few lefty equivalents just brings a little balance to the situation! Recognize everyone's right to shout out their points of view, it's what makes democracy interesting.

 

[K. Ash]

RNW,

why is it that you think "American media is full of arrogant, loud-mouthed, right wing windbags" ??

If you make a statement like that provide some reasoning.


As for Michael Moore, all pests go away if you ignore them.

 

[30 for 30]

Well, I was thinking Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, among others. I believe Limbaugh's show is the most widespread radio show in America. There's certainly no shortage of noisy right-wing American media commentators. They're nothing short of a growth industry these days. I'm not saying it's a terrible thing, if people want to listen to them then great, I'm just saying let the Left have their noisy s***-disturbers as well. There are left wing loudmouths and right wing loudmouths, these days both seem to be getting their say in US media, big deal. If anything it's healthy for debate.

 

[Goober]

...So why does MM think he should decide what people should see and hear?   ...

Its not that at all, he just doesn't like Fox.