Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Michael Moore - not quite the truth....      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 75
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....Page 6 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
Goebbels points are rather frightening, not to mention disheartening to say the least. What bothers me is the thinking of this aide, which would be the same no matter what party he worked for I suspect. He talks about creating 'realities', and about creating 'new' and 'other' realities. That's a crock of manure. There is one reality only and anyone who tries to manipulate individuals or societies in this way is a major part of the problems this world faces.
Power doesnt' shape truth - truth is. Nothing 'shapes' it. It's inflexible, unchangeable and the only effect power can have vis a vis truth is to either accept it and work with it - or deny it, as communism did, and ultimately fail.
I believe that one of our society's problems is that truth is now seen to be flexible, or if you want to argue from the moral points of view, secular truth - truth is whatever you'd like it to be. The world simply doesn't work that way.
I'm a very simplistic person - I believe in a basic morality and in right and wrong - there are some things that are simply wrong and that have been throughouth the history of mankind, but this isn't the place to get into that.
I believe that the truth is the right way to deal with the world and that people are better for having to deal with the truth, rather than some assortment of lies, the mix depending on just who is in power.
Before I wander too far off into la-la land with those thoughts, I think I'll state here that this thread has probably reached a natural conclusion, and I thank everyone for their comments and participation. I've learned a great deal from all of you and I appreciate the education you've provided me.
I'll leave this open for some last remarks tho, and I'll be thinking hard of some equally interesting topic to continue this with. Stay tuned!
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 76
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 7:59:35 AM
I'll address the remarks about Path to 9/11, since they're on topic. Yes, it was noted that by ABC that the show was not entirely factual, that it was, in fact, a docu-drama. Without getting into the entire debate on the show, unlike BFC or Sicko, ABC did include the following disclaimer:

The following movie is a dramatization which is drawn from a variety of sources...The movie is not a documentary...For dramatic and narrative purposes the movie contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue as well as time compression
. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image%3APathto911disclaimer.png)
In other words - we've been a bit loose with the facts here. I note for the record that a) Moore did not provide such a disclaimer and b) had he done so, this entire thread would be moot.
@ MG - it seems that the industry, based on ABC's comment that Path to 9/11 "is not a documentary" indicates that the industry clearly delineates between documentary truth and dramatizations. Care to revisit your earlier comments on this aspect of the debate?
And here I thought we'd milked this thread to death. Thank you Artz.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 77
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 10:06:59 AM
Artz, you and fireknight are so damned predictable, you're boring. I mean that. If there were a way to do so, I'd post outside here exactly what you clowns are going to say next - because 99% of the time, you're so damned predictable. And fireknight, if you took a remedial reading course, you'd see that I often cite Wiki - and that I did so in the post to which you are responding and which I also used for some comments on Moore's work as well. If you can't read what I write without imputing your own meanings to it, why on earth should I trust the veracity of anything you say or quote from others? Think about that before you respond, would you please?
And for both of you - you'll notice, we're now debating a RIGHT WING film - something several of you said I would not do because of my RIGHT WING BIAS. At least some of us aren't afraid of the facts on both sides of the fence.
So, before I fall asleep from reading your drivel, let me respond....
I didn't bother noting that ABC first touted this as a documentary because it's common knowledge that they did. It's also common knowledge - or at least I thought it was, obviously the left wingers missed this - that they were UNABLE to find sponsors for the show. Given the emotional component of it, I'm not particularly surprised.

In addition, a written and spoken disclaimer was aired at the beginning and end of the movie (and just past the midpoint of the first evening's broadcast) reminding viewers that the movie was a fictionalization.[73] The film "is not a documentary," ABC/Disney said.

The above would seem to make my point - ABC showed the integrity that Moore didn't, to publicly indentify that 9/11 is a fictionalization. That is incontrovertible. That they started out saying this was a documentary only makes them as bad as Moore - not any worse. (there, I've said it, ABC was dishonest in calling this a documentary - happy now? The difference is, they owned up to the truth - Moore didn't. And ABC at least HAS a news division
Now, to use your own semantics against you - this is a fictionalization - just like Moore's work...the end justifies the means, we want to get a debate going so rigid adherence to the truth isn't required - we can make our people say what they wish, etc. etc. ad infinitum et nauseum. I've heard it all from you guys.
So, tell me - why can't ABC do the same thing? Why do you - and I mean you two specifically, hold ABC to higher standards than those to which you hold Moore? Tit for tat boys. If you can't justify that, you have no business responding further in this thread - are you up to the challenge?
Artz, I didn't say I didn't like the turn of the thread - it simply appeared that we had beaten the subject to death. Since it appears we haven't, I'm more than pleased to continue.
Some additional comments:

The point has been made that Moore does present facts
Made, not proven by any means.

The right propaganda machine is well known for making up facts and out and out falsehoods claiming moral superiority.
I can't say here what I'd like to, but trust me, it's rude and it involves bodily functions, and ropes.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 79
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 11:33:49 AM

Constipation might explain a great many of your post here.
- good one Artz, I asked for that. My point was, I 'd appreciate a bit less vilification of the right wing here - believe it or not, they've got the nation's best interests at heart, they simply don't agree with the left on how to arrive at that point.
Fireknight, I don't see where your quotes estabblish that ABC was threatened legally by Congress - and given that the letter was sent by the Senate Democratic Leader and expressed their 'view' of the show, I think I'm on safe ground to state that it was a partisan letter not entirely reflective of the truth. I would also say more accurately that they were threatened by 'members' of the Senate - not by the body itself and that is a VERY different thing indeed.
In any event, the FACT remains, ABC did indeed state that their show was not a documentary (in the accepted sense of the word). Moore has not done this.
I'm going to digress here to say that while Moore may have used 'facts', he's still guilty of misdirection and blatant falsifying, such as with Heston's speech and the reasons for not changing the date of the annual meeting, in BFC. That kind of falsifying is bias and panders to the prejudices of the audience Moore is speaking to. It's not appropriate documentary practice imo, and certainly not something we would use in print media. It would be called 'libel', and be actionable. Before you start to argue that point, scroll way back to where I discussed it earlier.
Nonetheless, it is clear that both Moore and ABC (yes, I said both of them) have attempted to mislead the public with their 'variations' on the truth of the respective issues, however you try to justify Moore's deceptions in his various movies. Now do you plan to tell me that it's ok for Moore to deceive and not ABC, because that's clearly what I'm hearing you say. (Let's skip the weeny arguments about public broadcasting and movies, ok? The coverage of Moore's work has certainly hit the public airwaves giving it much broader coverage than, say, The Sound of Music).
Would it not be intellectually far more honest to say that both were wrong and that the only acceptable standard is the complete and unadorned truth? Can you manage that? I can, and just did, and will again.
Which, I'd like to point out, is what I've been saying all along...the truth, without spin, from both sides...please.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 80
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 11:41:22 AM

Power does shape the truth OP. Honest.

I hear you sly, but I'd say more accurately, power 'tries' to shape the truth. And sometimes it succeeds, but not for ever. Truth generally will out. That's why it makes more sense - any eleven year old will have learned this one - to tell Mom the truth, cuz she'll find out anyway.
Not to beat a dead dog, but this is what I've been trying to say all along...let's just go with the truth, whether your name is Moore, or ABC, or CIA, or****Cheney....Bill Clinton.....and on and on....
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 81
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 1:53:01 PM

I would wager in the US where it matters, and Canada that Path to 911 was seen by more then those who saw Moore's movie

You know, fireknight, that information isn't all that hard to find. I'd be really impressed if, instead of making it sound like you just might, maybe, be right about this, you actually found the facts on it. I'd be even more impressed if, should it turn out you're wrong, if you didn't blame THOSE facts on a right wing conspiracy of some sort.
Just out of curiosity, where does a network engineer's job entail possible loss of lives? On second thought, don't go there...anyone who posts in his profile
the hero who is always saving you but you never see.
may be delusional. I haven't the time for that.

when a National says they are presenting a Documentary or a Dramatized Documentary they believe the majority of it is true and are not viewing it with the same mindset
Did I not argue that exact same point regarding BFC and Sicko? Will you left wingers make up your mind? You cannot have it both ways - no matter how much whining and crying you do. If I grant you that point, you de facto grant it to me.
Some further points...

The right of today does not have the nation's best interests at heart.
the right is still very much more focused on whats good for the "movement, or the party, or their pockets" then the good of the nation...
The main reason people accused the Media of being Liberal was that facts didn't support them and so facts became "left leaning"
because the right has just said "this is the way it is, believe us, we are the right" and facts never enter into it.
the nation is suffering but the bulk of that abuse comes from the right and THAT is the fact of it.

Before you tell me again that I have a bias fireknight, please note that the above five quotes are just from your LAST post - I haven't slammed the left wing, other than your loopy imitation of it, that many times in twice as many posts.
fyi, a) I'm Canadian and so neither a democrat or republican. b) fact checking still occurs in the better publications and broadcast presentations c) I seem to recall some rather serious conversations about health care when Clinton was president. There were also some rather serious conversations about his propensity for lying - er, providing an altternative version of the truth I should say. Perhaps his presidency should have come with the ABC warning that graced 9/11.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 82
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 2:17:26 PM
candi apples, yes, to the extent that Moore has fomented discussion, but as I've said throughout this thread, I'd rather not have to be sifting anyone's material - right or left - for the truth before discussing it.
And I would say it's up to the individual working in the media to relieve us of the necessity of deciphering what is fact or fiction. That's their job and their responsibility and, quite frankly, they're failing at it. This reference to Gore's book 'An Assault on Reason' is something I agree with:

(the book) is an analysis of what he calls the "emptying out of the marketplace of ideas" in civic discourse, which, according to Gore, is due to the influence of electronic media, especially television, and which endangers American democracy; but he also expresses the belief that the Internet can revitalize and ultimately "redeem the integrity of representative democracy."

Now, can anyone explain to me how global warming ties in to the Nobel Peace Prize? Or inventing the internet? Or whatever it was that Gore did? Actually, just kidding about the last - I've just read his wiki bio and I'm quite impressed.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 83
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 3:48:35 PM
ok fireknight, you're a hero - and my comment to that is the same as Shania Twains' - that don't impress me much, since some of my friends are/were WW2 veterans. I simply note your self aggrandizement...
On to more mundane matters...
Your calculations on the number of viewers of the two movies is way too simplistic, I won't accept it. Furthermore, throwing in repeat viewers is about as specious as my suggesting the number is much higher because of the people who managed to sneak into the theatre or got 'freebie' tickets. Try again.
Fact checking in media is conducted prior to publication or broadcasting, not referenced as footnotes. So don't expect to see an appendix at the back of a book or movie called 'fact checking'. It isn't going to happen. fyi, media are generally provided with a copy of whatever speech they happen to be covering, which is why you so rarely see politicians go 'off message'.

compared to Bush a lie never passed his lips
This would be your explation for Clinton's disbarment then?

You're premise that something shown on TV as a documentary and something shown in a theater as a documentary are considered the same. The fact is they are not.

Fact is? Moore presented Sicko and BFC as documentaries and they are referred to everywhere I've seen as that. Where they are shown isn't the issue and you're being intellectually dishonest if you try to assert otherwise. I'm trying, (and failing it seems), to point out the blatant dishonesty of anyone, Moore or the producers of 9/11, who attempt to present as the truth something which in fact distorts or misrepresents it - as, in fact, both films (can we agree on that term?) did.
I'm NOT arguing right or left - although you seem to have a fixation on that aspect of this discussion. It's really quite tiresome.
 designingwoman
Joined: 9/4/2005
Msg: 84
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 3:53:08 PM
No one has been successful in suing Michael Moore. Nuff said!!
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 85
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 4:07:53 PM
Designing woman, that issue has been covered and there are good reasons why Moore has not been sued. Try reading back in the posts please. You might learn something.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 86
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 4:18:50 PM
Congratulations fireknight - I've just realized, after re-reading your last post and then doing some research on your comments, what an apt and accomplished student of your hero, Moore, you actually are.
In your explanation of just how many people have viewed Sicko as opposed to 9/11, you conveniently ignored a number of facts: for example, that Sicko has been available on the internet (some feel that Moore himself leaked it), so we have no idea how many more may have seen it there. 2000 more saw it at Cannes who certainly weren't in the paid column. There were numerous other unpaid showings, usually to groups of people influential in the debate.
Moore and you share a common trait - an ability to ignore facts which are inconvenient. I salute you. Rarely has someone I've debated gone to such lengths to prove my point.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 87
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 4:49:42 PM
Fireknight, where to begin with you?

I challenged you to provide and unlike the courtesy I have shown you by repeatedly getting the info when challenged you claim its not done.

I happen to be a member OF the media. I can state that it IS done, all the time. My own articles are factchecked regularly, I happened to have a discussion on that today with one of my editors. I know you have trouble accepting this, but you are wrong.
If I don't want to accept your stats on the number of viewers because I question your methodology, that's valid. I'll accept the $24 million figure you got from wiki, and the 28 million figure you got from wherever. But we both know, and it's in Wiki, that you've ignored other viewers and furthermore, we have no idea of the number of people who have viewed Sicko via the net. So - you're methodology is flawed because it doesn't take into account all the factors. Thus, I refuse to accept it. Nyaaa nyaaa!
re Clinton - I was discussing his disbarment by the state, not his impeachment. I knew you would make that error, I EXPECTED you to make that error. You prove quite clearly that you both fail to read what is clearly there and you don't stop to consider what you read, probably because of your bias.
Although I haven't looked it up, I believe that the NRA supports the 2nd amendment and also takes a position against gun violence. I might be wrong however - I can see some of them wanting to shoot the likes of you.
War of the Worlds? Someone beam me up, there's no intelligent life in this thread anymore.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 88
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 4:55:49 PM
I can't believe I actually said nyaa nyaa to fireknight. I only do that when logic and facts fail to penetrate and to listen to him, he's a veritable fount of facts.
Nice guy, I believe you just made my point about viewers and fireknight's analysis. Thank you....
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 89
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 5:32:28 PM

about 60+ million people will see Sicko

Fireknight, why aren't you contradicting nice guy? Please, be consistent. You wouldn't let me get away with this!
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 90
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/5/2007 8:34:37 PM
Dunrich, stop quoting that stuff would you? The left wingers are hiding now in the face of indisputable facts that contradict them...you're scaring them away with facts!
In all seriousness though, and I would hope some others on here will see it this way as well - the solution lies not in partisanship as espoused by Moore and others, right and left wing, but in looking hard, long and honestly at the best way to deliver timely and reasonably priced health care.
 Mike72801
Joined: 10/28/2007
Msg: 91
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/6/2007 3:07:34 AM
Moore has no credibility. His mockumentaries are laced with innaccuracies and half-truths. Gore has chosen to go down the same road.
 Politically INCORRECT
Joined: 8/14/2007
Msg: 92
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/6/2007 8:50:21 AM

All I want is some action for my taxes.

Fair point.

Many problems within the system,although it is not an "ideal" system, it is a far cry better than the US.
 sd_matt
Joined: 7/9/2006
Msg: 93
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 9/27/2009 3:00:00 PM
It's quite possible to lie while using established facts. Just give some, but not all, of the facts. This is the most universal way of doing it. It's a staple for the left and right.

There are ways around this. And at the beginning of this thread you hear an evaluation from the horses mouth.

Do this in everything. I have asked cops who work the street what would happen if we made all guns illegal and I give the most weight to their answer. If I had time I would do the same with people who went to prison for gun crimes and give equal weight to their answers.

Economics; Never a better time folks than now to separate the economist men from the boys. We have a collapse that might match the Great Depression and there were people warning us years before it happened. Do a Google keyword search and you will come up with some names. See what those people say in common.
 FrankNStein902
Joined: 12/26/2009
Msg: 94
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 5/29/2010 8:02:54 AM

It's quite possible to lie while using established facts. Just give some, but not all, of the facts. This is the most universal way of doing it. It's a staple for the left and right.

Very True!

I was one of the ones that thought that everything that I saw was true when I watched a M.M. documentary.

Now granted most of the things are true, but there has been more than one occasion that he has done some creative editing and leaving out of important details to exaggerate some points.

Did he wake up the left an get them engaged? Yes.

Did that also wake up the right and in some cases make things worse for the left? Yes.


IMO
He got drunk on his own power.


If you want some background check out this movie:

Manfacturing Dissent Movie DVD Uncovering Michael Moore

http://www.manufacturingdissentmovie.com
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Michael Moore - not quite the truth....