Disney Forbids Distribution of Film Criticizing Bush

colonel, this is no different that a parent barring a child from watching something, corporations were given the same rights as an individual has so obviously not being part of the government gives disney full discression to do whatever they feel with their products, do you suggest disney has to distribute somethig because you want them to? if so, then that would be just as bad as what you say you fight against and what you obviously despise would it not?

Originally posted by PurdueNuc
colonel, you do make a good point, whether or not it applies in this case. There has been evidence in the past of the gov't using tax breaks and federal funding to force others to do as they want. The best example I can think of is how the gov't threatened to hold back highway funding from states until they dropped their legal BAC to 0.08. Until "we the people" stop letting the federal gov't hold us hostage this way, this country is not the "united states" - it is "the state of America".

This is perfectly legal and constitutional. This is how the federal government gets states to ahere to their will but in the Disney case this is a private company fearing backlash from the government over political speech. Wrong.

That said, let me reiterate that there were surely other factors affecting this decision. You give me some evidence that the gov't would impose penalties on Disney for distributing Moore's movie, and that this was the primary motivator for this decision, then I'll listen.

Jeb Bush

There's no way Florida would impose penalties on Disney for something as trivial as this. Here's a couple reasons why:

Tourism is Florida' largest industry. The biggest attraction: Disney World.

Tourism/Recreation sales tax made up nearly 20% of the states total sales revenue in 2002. The Orlando area contributed 20% of this. Source

Florida needs Disney, hands down. They wouldn't do anything to hurt their relationship.

[Edited on 5/4/2004 by PurdueNuc]

Originally posted by PurdueNuc
There's no way Florida would impose penalties on Disney for something as trivial as this. Here's a couple reasons why:

Tourism is Florida' largest industry. The biggest attraction: Disney World.

Tourism/Recreation sales tax made up nearly 20% of the states total sales revenue. The Orlando area contributed 20% of this. Source

Florida needs Disney, hands down. They wouldn't do anything to hurt their relationship.

Disney is taking deep financial shots. Eisner is under fire. That bomb called The Alamo doesn't help either. Eisner doesn't need Jeb as another problem.

There's no way Florida would impose penalties on Disney for something as trivial as this. Here's a couple reasons why:

What would Disney do IF Jeb screwed them? Leave Florida? What could Disney do to Florida? Tell people, don't come? If Jeb screwed them because they are making decisions Jeb doesn't like, the only thing Disney could do id take it.

Originally posted by curme
If Disney said, hey we don't dig Moore. Then, that's their right. But they said, it doesn't matter what we believe, it's going to hurt our pocketbook, so we aren't going to support it. That is repugnent. If you are so afraid to say or do what you believe because of what other will say, well, you're definately not a member of ATS, but you're also sad and spineless.

I think this is a huge point. I can have no respect for anyone, individual or corporation that sits on the fence and won't say "Boo" for fear of losing a few bucks or friends because of what they might think about him/her.

I'm completely with Colonel on this one.

I've read both of Michael Moores older books (not the new one yet) and he has important things that we as a nation desperately NEED to absorb.

But even if I didn't like him I would still think very little of Disney for such a decision. Sure, they can do whatever the # they like. That's their right, but it doesn't make it RIGHT.

Personally if I was MM, I would take my product to a more deserving/sympathetic backer and leave the mini-van wooing soccer mom demographic contingent in the dust.

Where oh, where is a middle finger flicking smiley when you need one ?

Personally if I was MM, I would take my product to a more deserving/sympathetic backer and leave the mini-van wooing soccer mom demographic contingent in the dust.

I guess someone needs to come up with some heavy duty cash then, cause it seems that the distribution rights are owned by Miramax, which is division owned by Disney....



seekerof

Originally posted by curme
What would Disney do IF Jeb screwed them? Leave Florida? What could Disney do to Florida?

You tell me - you're the ones always complaining about how much power and influence corporations have in this country. I'd wager that Disney has enough political clout to make Jeb's political future ugly indeed.

Originally posted by PurdueNuc

Originally posted by curme
What would Disney do IF Jeb screwed them? Leave Florida? What could Disney do to Florida?

You tell me - you're the ones always complaining about how much power and influence corporations have in this country. I'd wager that Disney has enough political clout to make Jeb's political future ugly indeed.

Got to agree with that. What would the country think if Jeb tried to bitchslap Mickey? Also I don't think that Disney is without claws.

You people seem to forget that Michael Eisner is in trouble. If he gets any more (like Jeb Bush screwing his tax deals), he might just get the boot.

I'm not sure this is all over yet though. Miramax says that it doesn't believe Disney has a right to stop the release of the film

"But the New York Times said Miramax did not agree this was a situation where that clause should be invoked. "
news.bbc.co.uk...

So, my guess is that Disney will have to let things go, because any benefits it was trying to give the Republicans will be completely destroyed by people rightly accusing the corporation of politically motivated censorship.

I agree Disney has the right to stop films being released by Miramax that are "against it's interests" but I don't see how a left-wing film could be seen as being so. And if it is, then that's a very sorry message about the state of US freedom of speech.

And this argument holds regardless of whether you like or dislike Moore's documentary style.

I am in no way a Moore supporter (nor am I anti-moore, I have never seen one of his documentaries), but I see a lot of people bashing him saying all his information is false and he makes things up.

One thing I haven't seen, however, is evidence of this. Do people claim Moore lies just because they don't agree with what he says? Or is there evidence that he lies? I'm leaning towards the former.

[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Cutwolf]

Originally posted by Cutwolf
I am in no way a Moore supporter (nor am I anti-moore, I have never seen one of his documentaries), but I see a lot of people bashing him saying all his information is false and he makes things up.

One thing I haven't seen, however, is evidence of this. Do people claim Moore lies just because they don't agree with what he says? Or is there evidence that he lies? I'm leaning towards the former.

[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Cutwolf]

You are 100% CORRECT. People, most of which never even saw Bowling for Columbine, absolutely LOVE quoting some ninny NRA website about MM "LIES" when the fact is he really makes no assertions or conclusions in the movie.

It's a hodge podge of mostly ironic images told by OTHER PEOPLE he interviews.

Like interviewing the PR guy from the major defense contractor in Columbine...where he's saying "there's no culture of aggression and weaponry here" while he's standing in front of a giant missle.

Or simply walking into a bank that ADVERTISED free guns for opening a new checking account and filming the transaction. No commentary. Just an ironic look at the gun culture of America.

Yet, the NRA and the ilk POURED over the movie making all these mostly bogus charges like this was edited wrong, or to erroneously or whatever. Mostly BS nit-picky crap as if to say See! See! MM is a scum bag. Don't see the movie because this continuity error means nothing in it is true.

I think the most damning thing they had on him was some BS technicality where he said some released inmate raped and killed someone when they actually only killed them...whatever. He fixed it in the video release. Just ninny BS stuff.

It's a damn movie. He lets YOU draw the conclusions. By the way, he exposes Clinton hypocrisy as much as Bush in Bowling.

If you really want to know go to his website...he goes through EACH BS criticism by the NRA and right wing websites and answers them exposing what ninnies they are.

Seems to be alot of the wrong kind of Bush lovers in this debate.

Instead of trying to debunk and deny the writings and documentaries of MM (Michael Moore not Mickey Mouse), just admit that you don't want your beloved President bashed anymore cos' it makes your country look like the facist state that it really is.

If Jeb isn't behind Disney's fears, who is?

You don't spend millions making a contoversial documentary which could topple your government, and then say "We won't be releasing the film".....!!!, for no apparent reason.

You guys are living your lives in denial, because it suits you.

You stand by whilst the other man takens the brunt, as long as it isn't you.

Wake up and smell the hypocrisy, one day you will be the victim and there will be no-one left to help you...!!


Note: You guys refers to those individuals, not Americans as a whole.

Ignorance is a beautiful thing, isn't it?

First point I was going to make, was already made. Yes, Disney is a business and it's aim is to make money. But no one really qualified why they were making that argument. Historically it's bad business to involve a business, any business into the political scheme of things. Shame on Miramax for even thinking they could push Moore's political rhetoric or any rhetoric.

Second, I find it amazing that there are people that actually think that Kerry rate's or deserves his medals. Keep in mind I'm not a Republican or a hard-core right winger but a more moderate with some liberal viewpoints. Kerry wrote his own commendations/recommendations for medals. Research his 3rd Purple Heart that got him out of Vietnam. To add insult to injury he then threw his medals in protest and claimed he was witness to war atrocities. I think what makes the medal thing so distasteful to me is that he turned around 30 years later and then campaigned for government positions based on his military service and suddenly he was proud of his medals. If you are going to make a stand, make a stand, don't do it half way. Don't disrespect the honor and privilege of serving your country by throwing away medals in protest (keep in mind he wrote them for himself, he wasn't recommended by higher authority), then claims to be proud of them. Now we get to point two of this portion, does that mean I think Bush is more qualified or a better leader? Probably not, but I'd take him over Kerry any day of the week even though I don't agree with all of Bush's political ideas. I'd rather sacrifice a little in order to have a leader (?) that at least sticks by his decisions.

Three, and probably most importantly, it's not the Government that is refusing to market the movie, it's a private business. So if you try to sell me a product for me to put on the shelves of my store, do I have to sell your product? You better bet not. I have the RIGHT and the PRIVILEGE to make that decision on what is best for my company. Moore's rights aren't being trampled on, heck, they aren't even being looked at the wrong way. It's exactly this type of viewpoint and rhetoric that bolsters the claim that Moore is an idiot. Guess who is claiming his rights are being stepped on? That's right, Mr. Fricking Moore, who claims to be so in tune with rights and government and business and the international scene. Perhaps MM (not Mickey Mouse, he's cool) needs to learn the difference between what he thinks are his rights and what they really are. If he decides to fund and do his own movie, more power to him. But he shouldn't 'expect' a business to take the risk in doing his movie, or any other movie for that matter. If I went on that premise, I'd write a movie real quick and try to get a studio to do it. If they said no, I'd tell them they were violating my 1st Amendment rights. Now how stupid does that sound?

This is about Michael Moore and Disney. Please leave Kerry out of this. Why don't you talk about Bush and his veteran status and HIS medals while you're at it. Additionally, the movie is just about done so it was never abouot funding. Its about distribution.



[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Colonel]

I think the 1 thing that sticks out wrong, are the Quotes From Jeb Bush, Colonel posted Above, if this is true , this is wrong , Like Moore Do not like Moore. IF thoses are the reasons, then its forcing Disney to make this business Decision.


Also Bowling For Columbine did a great job on showing the Scare tatics of the American Media Comapred to Canada and Show real facts, thats the only Moore thing I have seen and it made a heck of a lot of sense

I forgot to mention Kerry served on a PT boat in Vietnam. How much atrocity do you suppose he was exposed to on the rivers of that small country?? I'll argue very few.

Originally posted by Colonel
This is about Michael Moore and Disney. Please leave Kerry out of this. Why don't you talk about Bush and his veteran status and HIS medals while you're at it. Additionally, the movie is just about done so it was never abouot funding. Its about distribution.



[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Colonel]

As a point of fact, Kerry was discussed earlier in the thread. I was addressing that. Bush served in the National Guard during Vietnam. What really is there to say?

Oh, yeah. Bush had to defend San Antonio against the evil Viet Cong, huh? Did he get a medal for that?