Moore: CNN are liars

It doesn't look like Time-Warner owns any interests.

Anyone got a list of CNN's major advertisers? I do remember pharma companies.

Moore maybe right, but he's got to leave behind his Conspiracy Nut personna. He just puts me off, and it's not really helping him. Conveniently, he seems to get all the media attention when he has a book or film to promote. Haven't heard a pip from him in the past couple of years. I thought the NSA finally got to him!

It seems to me that the "conspiracy nut" persona has been seriously helped along by big players in the media that don't like what Moore does. It also seems to me that you haven't heard from him for a couple of years because he's been busy working on SiCKO! Duh!

Here's another blog about Moore's exchange with Blitzer: Michael Moore Rips Wolf Blitzer on CNN: "Why Don't You Tell the American People the Truth" [VIDEO]

Looking over Moore's detailed response to Gupta, 'SiCKO' Truth Squad Sets CNN Straight, I can see the conservative talking points taking shape already. I wonder if Gupta or his assistants did the research themselves or if they received it ready made from health care or big pharma lobbyists. I expect that the blow hards on the radio will cite Gupta verbatim to rebut SiCKO and they'll say things like "I'm not making this up folks. This is straight from the liberal CNN - the communist news network, ditto, ditto, ditto."

Boy, there's something to be said for charisma and demeanor. If Moore turns out to be 100% right about everything he's ever said, he'll still be a total jackass and I will still want to punch his obnoxious face in.

But you won't do that will you?

Over lunch I heard CNN apologize for that incident because they admitted they got one fact wrong -- it was related to Cuba and spending 25$/year instead of 250$ --- but claimed they were confident that the rest of their facts were correct.

It doesn't take a trained monkey to discredit Michael Moore.

Quote:

Original post by capn_midnight It doesn't take a trained monkey to discredit Michael Moore.

Apparently it takes a very highly trained monkey to do so - a doctor/neurosurgeon/journalist monkey - and even then he has to fudge the facts and later on apologize for his gaffs...

Ouch!

It's amazing that it's so easy to discredit Michael Moore and the only thing posted so far in this thread are variations of "I just don't like him".

If you actually watch the

>CNN video, they could've done a hell of a lot better job discrediting Moore.

They even seem to agree with the very basic Moore assertion that health care in the US could be a lot better.

The mistake over the costs in Cuba vs US is pretty obvious, but it conceded that it was still a good point about the cost of health care in the US. So while it made a mistake on what Moore sad, it didn't go out and say "Moore is wrong, fuck 'em," in fact, it actually said something that he would've approved of: "and astronomically more money [for healthcare] doesn't mean better outcomes."

I could easily imagine a lot of conservatives getting pissed at CNN for being too supportive.

Quote:

Original post by oliii Moore maybe right, but he's got to leave behind his Conspiracy Nut personna. He just puts me off, and it's not really helping him.

Granting your characterization for a minute, I have to ask: Not helping him do what? Sell movies? Or do you mean he's not doing any favors for his position? Or are you just concerned about people's opinion of him regardless of how it impacts his wallet or his position?

Quote:

Conveniently, he seems to get all the media attention when he has a book or film to promote.

When or why else would you expect media attention focused on the man?

Quote:

Original post by capn_midnight It doesn't take a trained monkey to discredit Michael Moore.

But they show up anyway.

Quote:

Original post by Prinz Eugn If you actually watch the >CNN video, they could've done a hell of a lot better job discrediting Moore. They even seem to agree with the very basic Moore assertion that health care in the US could be a lot better. The mistake over the costs in Cuba vs US is pretty obvious, but it conceded that it was still a good point about the cost of health care in the US. So while it made a mistake on what Moore sad, it didn't go out and say "Moore is wrong, fuck 'em," in fact, it actually said something that he would've approved of: "and astronomically more money [for healthcare] doesn't mean better outcomes." I could easily imagine a lot of conservatives getting pissed at CNN for being too supportive.

It seems to me that if CNN didn't agree with the basic assertion that health care in the US could be a lot better, it's viewers would know they were fibbing.

To quote from Moore's rebuttal: "The fact that the healthcare system in an impoverished nation crippled by our decades-old blockade (including medical supplies and drugs) ranks so closely to ours is more an indictment of the American system than the Cuban system."

To quote from CNN ( Analysis: 'Sicko' numbers mostly accurate; more context needed): "The United States spends more than 15 percent of its GDP on health care -- no other nation even comes close to that number. France spends about 11 percent, and Canadians spend 10 percent."

We spend a whole lot more than any other nation and yet 50 million people remain uncovered. And that's to say nothing of the tens of millions - probably 100 million - who's coverage is inadequate - per the thrust of SiCKO.

I just think that it's an overreaction to say that CNN is actively attacking Moore , I'm not saying he's wrong.

He seems to take it as a personal affront that CNN doesn't give him a medal, which of course only makes him less likable.

I think his main beef is that the mainstream media comes off as being 99.9% correct and some sort of moral authority. To the point that they can challenge his movies implying that they (media) will get to the real truth. As Moore pointed out, he's put out 3 movies. Though all 3 movies may have exaggerated or took some liberty with the facts, the movies for the most part were spot on. So for CNN or any news outlet to approach his movie as if to debunk it, can be pretty irritating.

Quote:

Original post by Prinz Eugn I just think that it's an overreaction to say that CNN is actively attacking Moore , I'm not saying he's wrong. He seems to take it as a personal affront that CNN doesn't give him a medal, which of course only makes him less likable.

He was much less confrontational when he went on Larry King two weeks ago, even though he had been bumped from an earlier appearance to make room for Paris Hilton. I wonder if he would have been as confrontational had Blitzer not led with Gupta's "fact check"? One of the comments in the crooks and liars discussion of the exchange might explain Moore's anger:

Quote:

Oh, that CNN is quick to see whether “controversial” Michael Moore’s facts check out. They did a “reality check” on his new movie, and almost everyone has something to say. But when it comes to the “facts” that our government pushes every day, CNN doesn’t want to look too deeply. What a surprise.

Perhaps CNN reserves it's close scrutiny for upstarts and threats to the status quo but not for those with an interest in perpetuating the status quo? Anderson Cooper used to do a segment where he tracked the administration's talking points, noting the words and phrases that various spokes people used repeatedly to explain their policies to the media. For some reason he stopped doing that segment. Maybe it cut too close to home for the White House and they threatened to cut off access for CNN?

He has things to say, but nobody likes a whinner. He's taken a lot of flak for his stand, but he should just tone it down a bit. I prefer the way Chomsky does it, even if he sometimes gets hot under the collar as well. For me, MM is a bit too much and he offers himself as a nice target by speaking vociferously like that.

Quote:

Original post by oliii He has things to say, but nobody likes a whinner. He's taken a lot of flak for his stand, but he should just tone it down a bit. I prefer the way Chomsky does it, even if he sometimes gets hot under the collar as well. For me, MM is a bit too much and he offers himself as a nice target by speaking vociferously like that.

Yeah, because Chomsky's message is so widely received... The average American doesn't even know who the guy is. What exactly is Moore supposed to "tone down"? If anything, it is the administration and the media that should be asked to tone down their rhetoric and fear-mongering.

He's a very narrowly-constrained rabble rouser. All his work, right back to Roger & Me, is based far more on demeaning the current state of affairs than on offering any sort of advice or proposing any sort of solution. In an imperfect world, it is the easiest thing to find fault, and a powerful thing to make people hate.

His writing and his film-making always root themselves in insult and criticism, and whenever anyone asks him what he would rather see, he comes back with stuff like telling Wolf Blitzer that CNN should have "done their job" four years ago... and what? Prevented the war? Turned public opinion against the administration and incited a coup? Overthrown the government and put Moore in charge? What series of decisions, what course of action, would have made him happy? What must the world become for him to turn off his hate machine?

Even in that very interview, he came in, shot off his mouth about Dr. Gupta's data, but before the conversation turns to facts, he shifts gears and drowns Blitz out with a line of irrelevant ranting about the war and his past movies and CNN's role in the downfall of society. He cannot discuss, or even argue, and so he turns up the volume and shouts slogans that will get his fanboys riled up and on his side, so that after the "interview", the discussions (like this one) will go like this:

Anti-Moore: CNN made some good points, and the film, while being an interesting look at the situation, is really only the first chapter in a long story that needs to be told before an appropriate course of action can be decided on.

Pro-Moore: What are you smoking? CNN is a fucking toolbox, and they should sacrifice all their children to Moore to atone for their sins! Where are the WMDs? Why are guns still legal? Every time a baby cries, CNN and Dubya rub their asses together and do a little victory dance! Anyone who doesn't see the fundamental truth in this is a conspirator in the great plot that has no specific goal beyond making a few very rich men richer and discrediting the prophet/messiah Moore!

I believe that there is no set of circumstances, no state of affairs that will not see Moore seeking out something that he can crusade against, some hateful rampage that his fans will unite to loathe. He presents one-sided characterizations of specific issues in such a way that arguments against him, even correct ones, seem blasphemous. It's the old, "Do you support pay raises for unskilled migrant laborers, or do you enjoy seeing babies starve to death?" technique.

He's a two-bit demagogue, and I am ashamed that my countrymen put his ass on a pedestal and worship what spews forth.

Edit:

Quote:

But you won't do that will you?

What? What won't I do? Punch him in the face? I didn't say I would, I said I would want to. And yes, I will want to punch him in his abusive, loud, hate-filled mouth. I already do that every day. If I was alone in a room with him, would I? Yes, I would. Want to, that is. Wanting is an action, just like punching is, and even though I would not, under any reasonable circumstances, sock that sophist in the kisser, I do in fact want to do it just about every time he opens it up. He's not the only one.

Quote:

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage He's a very narrowly-constrained rabble rouser. All his work, right back to Roger & Me, is based far more on demeaning the current state of affairs than on offering any sort of advice or proposing any sort of solution. In an imperfect world, it is the easiest thing to find fault, and a powerful thing to make people hate.

His films are documentaries, that is, they "document" reality. Moore has a particular take on things and therefore the documentaries are obviously biased but the point is obviously to generate skepticism and discussion. The media also attempts to document reality, although not with documentary films, but with news reports and occasionally commentary. They don't offer a solution, either, so why should Moore? What's wrong with reporting about what you think is wrong and why you think that? Moore doesn't have all the answers and he doesn't pretend to, either. It's worth pointing out that in SiCKO, he takes a look at foreign health care systems implying that perhaps taking a look at their model is a starting point. He mentions that the French have a strong tradition of protesting and demanding things from the government, that the government fears its citizens and not vice versa.

So what's your point again?

Quote:

His writing and his film-making always root themselves in insult and criticism, and whenever anyone asks him what he would rather see, he comes back with stuff like telling Wolf Blitzer that CNN should have "done their job" four years ago... and what?

Who does he insult in SiCKO? And are you saying he shouldn't criticize either? I wouldn't be able to take you seriously, then. Why don't you taste some of your own medicine and see how it works. Instead of insulting and criticizing Moore, offer a solution and be positive. Let's see your radical vision implemented! In the case of the Iraq War, should we report more positive news?

Moore was right on the mark when he called out Wolf on not doing his job. It's not as if this is something that happens very often on CNN. He made a powerful point.

Quote:

Prevented the war? Turned public opinion against the administration and incited a coup? Overthrown the government and put Moore in charge? What series of decisions, what course of action, would have made him happy? What must the world become for him to turn off his hate machine?

Had the media done their jobs, the outrage against this administration would have come sooner and with greater force. The media have a powerful responsibility: to present reality.

Quote:

Even in that very interview, he came in, shot off his mouth about Dr. Gupta's data, but before the conversation turns to facts, he shifts gears and drowns Blitz out with a line of irrelevant ranting about the war and his past movies and CNN's role in the downfall of society.

I think he challenged Wolf to show him which facts were wrong and he promised that a rebuttal would be up on his web site. And that's what happened. Dr. Gupta turned out to be wrong after all.

Quote:

Anti-Moore: CNN made some good points, and the film, while being an interesting look at the situation, is really only the first chapter in a long story that needs to be told before an appropriate course of action can be decided on. Pro-Moore: What are you smoking? CNN is a fucking toolbox, and they should sacrifice all their children to Moore to atone for their sins! Where are the WMDs? Why are guns still legal? Every time a baby cries, CNN and Dubya rub their asses together and do a little victory dance! Anyone who doesn't see the fundamental truth in this is a conspirator in the great plot that has no specific goal beyond making a few very rich men richer and discrediting the prophet/messiah Moore!

Hah! Yeah right. That's not the current state of discourse and you know it. You're completely misrepresenting what the anti-Moore camp is saying.