Disney blocking release of new Michael Moore film

[MTK]

ouch, spoken like true conservatives.

Can anyone deny that Disney has an agenda here in choosing to not distribute this film?

[SkinsRock]

Censorship by the government is wrong. But any private company has the right to refuse to do business with someone if they feel it will reflect badly on them. I believe Disney is the "evil empire", but if they refuse to distribute his film, it's up to him to find someone who will.
He is just trying to generate publicity and cause a stir by bitching about it.

[JWsleep]

Why exactly did Disney sign on with Moore in the first place? Didn't they watch his previous movies?

Also, corporate censorship does exist. A very small group of media companies controls most of the major avenues of speech in this country, and they have an inordinant amount of control over what actually reaches the general public. I think the internet helps, but watch out for corporations influencing the government to restrict that access.

The previous paragraph makes me sound like a Chomsky-style conspiracy guy, but this is the line that conservative columnist William Safire pushes in his op-ed stuff, so it cuts across the spectrum.

Also, I'm not saying that Disney has to distribute the film, but then they should release Moore to find new distribution in the US.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

Also, corporate censorship does exist. A very small group of media companies controls most of the major avenues of speech in this country, and they have an inordinant amount of control over what actually reaches the general public. I think the internet helps, but watch out for corporations influencing the government to restrict that access.

...

Also, I'm not saying that Disney has to distribute the film, but then they should release Moore to find new distribution in the US.

JW, I agree with your first point -

Because media corporations have a vested interest in pleasing the public, they will tend to follow a strategy that, at best, is non-controversial and, at worst, feeds the lowest common denominator. In doing so, they can and do self censor, refuse to produce, or otherwise inhibit the production of controversial or fringe (either fringe) materials. As a result, these corporations can limit public access and, thus, limit public awareness of conflicting viewpoints. I agree that, as citizens, we have a duty to be informed and to look beyond the simple paff fed us by those who have an interest in giving us information we find pleasing.

-(One of my favorite Calvin and Hobbes cartoons has Calvin asking "Marx said 'Religion is the opiate of the masses' I wonder what that means?" To which the TV replies "He hadn't seen anything yet")-

As to the second:

I seriously doubt Disney held a gun to Moore's head and forced him to sign with the company. It's Disney for God's sake; one of the most image conscience corporations out there. What? Did he mistakenly think they were some radical independent going to give him free reign? No, he knew they were a big corp that could give him plenty of what he craves - exposure.

He made choices too - Now he has to live with them.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Can anyone deny that Disney has an agenda here in choosing to not distribute this film?

Absolutely Disney had an agenda. Aren't they entitled too?

Didn't Moore have one in making it?

[skinsfanthru&thru]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

ouch, spoken like true conservatives.

Can anyone deny that Disney has an agenda here in choosing to not distribute this film?

if u were the head of disney, would u wish to release a heavily one sided political movie about a very sensitive subject, especially during an election year?
i had heard the thing about disney telling moore a year ago on headline news and in the interview he didn't deny it being true about him knowing miramax wouldn't be releasing his movie for about a year, but he did say the past few days because of this, his phones have been ringing off the hook. this guy from day one has sounded like someone who'd do anything to get his movies publicity as long as it helped him make more money. if he's so intent on uncovering "political conspiracies" why hasn't he made any movies about waco?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by skinsfanthru&thru

if he's so intent on uncovering "political conspiracies" why hasn't he made any movies about waco?

Because there was no conspiracy at Waco. None at all. Forget you ever heard the terms "conspiracy" and "Waco" in the same sentence.

You have been warned.

[Carnage]

If you have to suppress free infomation to aid your cause, the cause needs to be examined more.