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 ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 2:18pm
Honey?

Likely voters == Those who voted in the 2000 Presidential Election.

A head to head poll that is a statistical tie == disaster and warrents pity on me?

I'm speechless, keep on posting.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 2:52pm
Isn't that what happened with that reporter (named has slipped my mind) from the NYT who was making up his news stories?

I remembered his name....Jayson Blair. Boy did he put a good one over on the NYT.


Edited 8/4/2004 11:35 am ET ET by debateguy

Avatar for schifferle
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 7:12pm
Polls sway back & forth, up & down and all around. Things change constantly. Even polls very close to an election don't necessarily predict who the winner will be. That said, heeeere's another poll! =)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-01-poll-kerry_x.htm

Poll: No boost for Kerry after convention

By Susan Page, USA TODAY

Last week's Democratic convention boosted voters' impressions of John Kerry but failed to give him the expected bump in the head-to-head race against President Bush, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll finds.





In the survey, taken Friday and Saturday, Bush led Kerry 50%-46% among likely voters. Independent candidate Ralph Nader was at 2%.

The survey showed Kerry losing 1 percentage point and Bush gaining 4 percentage points from a poll taken the week before the Boston convention.

The change in support was within the poll's margin of error of +/-4 percentage points in the sample of 763 likely voters. But it was nonetheless surprising, the first time since the chaotic Democratic convention in 1972 that a candidate hasn't gained ground during his convention.

USA TODAY extended its survey to Sunday to get a fuller picture of what's happening.

A Newsweek poll taken Thursday and Friday gave the Democratic ticket a 49%-42% lead. Over three weeks, that reflected a 4-point "bounce" for Kerry, the smallest ever in the Newsweek poll.

Among registered voters in the USA TODAY poll, Kerry and Bush each had 47%. Bush was up 4 points, Kerry unchanged from the pre-convention survey.

Analysts said the lack of a bounce may reflect the intensely polarized contest. Nearly nine of 10 voters say their minds are made up and won't change. "The convention, typically a kicking-off point for a party, is now merely a reaffirmation" of where voters stand, said David Moore, senior editor of the Gallup Poll.

"In a race this tight, the polls are going to be all over the place," said Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's communications director. "Most importantly, voters now clearly trust John Kerry more than Bush to lead and defend America."

But Matthew Dowd, chief strategist for the Bush campaign, said "history doesn't bode well" for Kerry. Since World War II, the three challengers who have unseated presidents held clear leads after their conventions.

Democratic leaders have expressed delight about the convention, which showed a united party and emphasized national security. Those surveyed gave the convention and its candidate high marks:

Kerry's acceptance speech Thursday was rated as "excellent" by 26%, a more positive response than Bush got in 2000. A 44% plurality said the Democrats were "about right" in criticizing Bush; 30% said they went too far.

Views of Kerry's personal characteristics and leadership improved; views of Bush didn't change much. Bush's edge in handling terrorism was shaved to 12 points from 18. In a switch, Kerry now is trusted more to handle the responsibilities of commander in chief, by 51%-46%.

Kerry's military service is seen as a plus. A 52% majority says it would help him be an effective president. More than one in four say it makes them more likely to vote for him.

Poll results: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 7:56pm
Thís "abroad" understood that SH was ousted after major battle (systematic bombing).

This "abroad" understood that SH was a serious threat to the Iraqi's, the region and the world.

This "abroad" was and is véry aware (applying common sense) that combat would not be totally over for some time to come, but that taking out SH was a major accomplishment.

This "abroad" news-broadcasts

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 8:05pm
<<"And I was going to ask you what colors you are planning to paint and if you were doing anything special with the ceiling beyond 'ceiling white' ! Darn.">>.... same here. In fact I was ready to suggest some colour-schemes until I read that it wasn't a true story.

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Tue, 08-03-2004 - 9:35am
--

Honey if you don't understand how important the poll of likely voters is vs approval rating... I pity you. Of those who are most likely to vote, Bush gained as a result of the DNC convention... this is ULTRA not good for Democrats... indeed it's a disaster. If you do NOT understand a disaster has hit the Kerry campaign... you again have more pity.

--

heheheh, Honey.

Hey ummm, since you're like, such a poll junkie and whatnot. CBS says that registered voters have Kerry 6 pts over Bush.

I'm sure it's ULTRA lots of stuff, but nothing comes to mind right now.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Tue, 08-03-2004 - 10:09am
Please forward this to the folks who make Bush / Cheney 2004 TV commercials.

"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."

Wouldn't it have been nice to know that when the ad says that Kerry supported a 50 cent per gallon gasoline tax, that it was over 20 years ago, and that it was just an idea he was discussing with a reporter?

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Tue, 08-03-2004 - 11:16am
Lesson from our own recent (June 28th) elections: polls can be all totally wrong. Recent polls just before the elections (4 days before) were saying it was a very close election.

Well... it wasn't even close by a long shot!

be wary of polls....

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Tue, 08-03-2004 - 11:29am
I agree 100% On election day in 1992, Bush/Clinton were tied in a head to head poll.

That's why I look to the Bush Approval rating and the satisfaction level of the country, or 'Do you agree the country is headed in the right direction'.

My other formula, not meant to be predicative of anything is:

A. How many who voted for Gore in 2000 will vote for Bush in 2004?

B. How many who voted for Bush in 2000 will not vote for him again in 2004?

If B > A then Herman Munster is President.

I can't see Kerry not winning any states that Gore carried in 2000.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Tue, 08-03-2004 - 11:57am
An unscientific observation:

I live in a VERY Republican area. People here know how I'm voting (could it be the sign, could it be the bumper sticker?)

Some have told me they will be voting for Kerry but they will not be making it public. The Bush supporters are so vocal, so condemning that they prefer to let others assume what they will and mark the Kerry box when no one is watching.

I don't know if this is common, but I wonder.