violation of freedom of expression
Find a Conversation
violation of freedom of expression
| Wed, 05-05-2004 - 1:22pm |
Here is an article from CNN
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/05/moore.disney/index.html
I would love to see that documentary

But there is no Constitutional right to have his work published, distributed, or released by someone else. Claiming 1st Amendment violations for this sort of thing is absurd, and does nothing but illustrate a widespread failure to understand what the 1st Amendment does and does not protect.
~mark~
This is an interesting point. The freedom of speech does not apply to corporations, only the government. However, this administration is so linked with corproations, that corporations fear retaliation for adhering to the right of free speech. Will this go to the Supreme Court? I agree with you, the Bushes are using Disney to restrain speech. And this is not new, CBS withdrew the Reagan mini-series; and Nightline was dark in some markets. Political Correctness in a new light.
Freedom of expression is just that, the freedom of an individual to express his or her personal beliefs, thoughts, or feelings through speech, writing, photography, art, film, or whatever other means you can conceive of. Nobody is preventing Moore from doing that, nobody. He was free to make the film, but that's where his rights end. If he wants his film to be seen it's ultimately his responsibility to put it in the publics eye if he can't get someone to do it for him. If it was a book, it would ultimately his responsibility to publish and distribute it if nobody else was willing to do so for him. If it was a painting, it would be up to him to display it in the event no gallery chooses to display it for him. In all such cases, there is no right to have any of those actions undertaken by other parties.
There's no Constitutional rights violation here, as there is no Constitutional right to have your work published or released by anyone other than oneself.
~mark~
There is the issue of political pressure. If Disney fears political retaliation, in the form of lost tax breaks, that's unfortunate. But it wouldn't be the first time the tax code was used to encourage or punish; it happens all the time. Its still not a constitional issue.
There is no right for his work to be published or viewed in a public forum. It's up to others whether or not to publish/release his work, and that's a business issue, not a 1st Amendment issue. So while I respect your feelings and opinion on the issue, there's really no freedom of expression violation here. That right addresses the right of an individual to create for *themselves*, to express *themselves*, not to have their work published, printed, or released by *others*. That's a business issue, not a Constitutional issue.
~mark~
Op-ed: Disney's Trap.
http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2004/mft04050606.htm
Disney's (NYSE: DIS) handling of its dispute with filmmaker Michael Moore is just plain goofy.
The company has reportedly decided to block its Miramax film unit from releasing a documentary by Moore, who won an Oscar in 2002 for Bowling for Columbine. The new film, Fahrenheit 911, is said to be a controversial (surprise!) look at the September 11 attacks and the Bush family's relationship with prominent Saudis.
(Me: This relationship isn't a big secret.)
Already the accusations are flying. According to various sources, Ari Emmanuel, Moore's agent, claims that Disney CEO Michael Eisner expressed concern that the movie could threaten Disney's tax breaks for its theme park in Florida, where the president's brother, Jeb Bush, is governor. Disney, meanwhile, asserts that it told Moore a year ago that Miramax would not distribute the film, and that he is now pulling a publicity stunt by making an issue of the decision.
~mark~