Aren't Documentaries Non-fiction?

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Aren't Documentaries Non-fiction?
31
Sat, 07-31-2004 - 8:40pm
Illinois Paper Hits Michael Moore for Copyright Infringement

By E & P Staff

Published: July 31, 2004

NEW YORK The Pantagraph newspaper in Bloomington, Ill. has sent a letter to Michael Moore, drafted by its lawyer, citing him for copyright infringement, admonishing him for his "unauthorized...misleading" use of the paper in his film "Fahrenheit 9/11," and asking for an apology.

It is also seeking compensatory damages of exactly one dollar.

"While we are highly flattered to be included in the movie," said the newspaper's President and Publisher Henry Bird, "we are a bit disturbed that our pages were misrepresented."

Early in the movie, according to the paper, a large headline appears in the film, purporting to be from a Dec. 19, 2001 edition of the paper, and reading "Latest Florida recount shows Gore won election." The paper contends that the headline actually appeared on Dec. 5, 2001, in much smaller type, and above a letter to the editor, hardly a factual news story or editorial.

The letter to Moore from the paper calls this a "misrepresentation of facts." The newspaper said it had been unsuccessful in attempts to reach Moore through his film company, Lion's Gate, by phone and email.

"In an instance that The Pantagraph prints material in which there is a mistake it is corrected," the letter to Moore reads. "It is our hope that you would adhere to the same high ethical standard."

Moore could not be reached for comment.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000590756

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 8:03am
Taking things out of context, and lying are apparently 2 different things.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2004
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 8:51am
The only thing I have to say about misleading is:

"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 8:59am
<<"The only thing I have to say about misleading is: "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"">>.... are you refering to how MM took that phrase/those images to imply (thus misleading the audience to believe) as if Bush declared the war was over?

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 9:51am
Presenting an opinion as journalism is indeed a lie, Moore knows this, so the the lawyers for the paper threatening to sue him.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 9:53am
Removing statements or actions from their proper, pertinent context makes them a lie, especially when it's used to deliberately mislead those viewing or hearing them.

~mark~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2004
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 10:00am
What happened first, MM movie or Bush using that banner? Now when you answer that, voices were raised right after Bush used that banner, way before the MM movie came out, or do you not remember that happening? Do you want me to find clippings about all of the fuss right after it happened? I have not seen the movie so I am going assume that he used it in his movie as you say.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 10:21am
I remember the images and the banner and the controversy (or fuss, as you call it :)) about it.

I álso remember that

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 10:37am
Oh I get it, It's journalism now?

If as much effort went into fixing and running the country as there has been efforts to discredit John Kerry and Michael Moore (Who is so IRRELEVANT, it's laughable) there'd be very little to talk about besides the State of the Nation.

But hey, go for it. I'm all for the efforts to get Moore and put him in his place!

Avatar for schifferle
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 11:01am
<< I'm all for the efforts to get Moore and put him in his place! >> And what a popular guy he is...


http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/entertainment

Posted on Sun, Aug. 01, 2004








Saudi Royals Dispute 'Fahrenheit 9/11'

Associated Press


LONDON - The Saudi royal family has taken issue with Michael Moore's film "Fahrenheit 9/11" for claiming that high-ranking Saudi nationals were allowed to flee the United States immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Prince Turki al-Faisal, the Saudi Arabian ambassador to London and a half-brother of Crown Prince Abdullah, said in an interview published Sunday that Moore did not do proper research for his documentary on the aftermath of the terror attacks.

In the film, Moore claims that the Bush administration helped a number of Saudi princes and members of the bin Laden family to flee the United States at a time when American airspace had been closed to all commercial traffic.

Al-Faisal, who was in charge of Saudi intelligence at the time, said his country has been completely exonerated of any role in the attacks by the 9/11 commission.

The commission's report found no evidence that any flights of Saudi nationals took place before the reopening of national airspace on Sept. 13.

"It would have been far better if Michael Moore had been able to read the 9/11 report before he made his film," al-Faisal told The Sunday Telegraph. "It shows that all the protocols were strictly observed."

Al-Faisal said that Moore was granted a visa to visit Saudi Arabia but never went.

"He missed an important opportunity to find out key facts," he said. "In my opinion he should have made every effort to go to a country he has taken to task so heavily in his film."





iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2004
Sun, 08-01-2004 - 11:43am


I have heard many stories, but the ousting of Sadaam was one I have not heard to the banner. This is what I found...

"The president told reporters the sign was put up by the Navy, not the White House. Now his statements are being parsed even further. Navy and administration sources said that though the banner was the Navy's idea, the White House actually made it. Bush offered the explanation after being asked whether his speech declaring an end to major combat in Iraq under the "Mission Accomplished" banner was premature, given that U.S. casualties in Iraq since then have surpassed those before it."

Then in the same story, it goes into...

"The banner signified the successful completion of the ship's deployment," he said, noting the Abraham Lincoln was deployed 290 days, longer than any other nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in history"

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/28/mission.accomplished/

Another story...

"President Bush’s top political adviser said this week that he regretted the use of a “Mission Accomplished” banner as a backdrop for the president’s landing on an aircraft carrier last May to mark the end of major combat operations in Iraq.Rove echoed Bush’s contention that the phrase referred to the carrier crew’s completing their 10-month mission, not the military’s completing its mission in Iraq."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4760238/

So one of 2 things is going on, you are hearing information that we Americans are not, or you do not know what you are talking about and just putting words into Bush's mouth. (which one really should not do, he does enough damage on his own!)



Pages