It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Ads for Moore’s movie could be stopped on July 30

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 03:12 AM
Michael Moore may be prevented from advertising his controversial new movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” on television or radio after July 30 if the Federal Election Commission (FEC) today accepts the legal advice of its general counsel.

At the same time, a Republican-allied 527 soft-money group is preparing to file a complaint against Moore’s film with the FEC for violating campaign-finance law.

Appears Republican apparatchiks are attempting to 1) increase this weekend's ticket sales for Moore's film, 2) increase net profit of Moore's film by reducing its marketing costs, or 3) both 1 and 2.

This movie has got to be either the biggest lie Republicans want us to see, or the biggest lie Democrats want us to see.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 03:17 AM
and what lie would that be?

it's not a movie about Bush so what are these republicians all hard about?

btw I am seeing it this weekend, so BFD, after july 30th? lol Word is already spread around, so it gets about a month of being advertise, aww poor lil angry neocons, too little too late I'm afraid.

What is so revealing about this moving that they can't stand for anyone to see it, they were pushing for an NC-17 rating, but it's R. lol some people are just lame, all that effort on something so meaningless, meanwhile with all the money they blow on crap like this, it could go toward bettering America.


posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 03:21 AM
So, uhh, I didn't realize this movie was a lie. Although, I haven't seen it, the people coming out of the movie are talking about some of the interesting ideas and questions brought up in the movie. While, some of the movie may be false, I don't think you can automatically write off the movie as a lie without seeing it.

Personally, I'm going to go into the movie with an open mind, and then read about what some of the people interviewed have said.

Despite my reserves at people automatically writing off this movie as a lie through some strange gag reflex at Bush criticism
I think it makes sense for this reform to stand here.

The funny thing is, Bush's campaigns are financed by Bush-Cheney 04, Inc. So does that count as a corporation as well? Kerry's is also Kerry for President, Inc.

I guess they wouldn't count because they aren't technically corporations. But anyway, the law presented in the article is very vague.

[edit on 25-6-2004 by Jamuhn]

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 03:28 AM
All publicity is good publicity, so they say, but perhaps the maxim won't apply following the advertising ban.

I read elsewhere that some movie chains weren't going to handle this movie, but then I read that it's actually going to open in more cinemas than Moore's earlier work [can't remember which one though]. I'll be very interested in hearing reviews of Fahrenheit from Lysergic & other ATS members.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 03:41 AM
In the 1990s, the Democrats and some moderare Republicans fought for campaign reform bills that were intended to ban soft money campaign attack ads. The idea was that special interest groups could bombard the airwaves before an election and unfairly influence a political campaign... which, in turn, generated fundraising races... so the McCain Feingold bill came around and promised to end things like late campaign attack ads by special interest groups.

So... here comes Michael Moore.

His film is obviously biased, and, considering that he celebrated its premier with Democrats in Washington, its aimed to achieve an effect. So... by even lenient standards, it falls under the restrictions of the McCain Feingold bill...

Which means that the producers can't engage in attack ads up to 60 days before a deciding campaign election (like a nominaging convention).... which also means that the ads for the movie need to be banned.

Now, do i agree with such 'censorship'... well, no... But I MUST point out that Democrats are now only complaining about rules that THEY put in place. If Moore is allowed to air his attack ads... which he should be.. then conservative groups should have the right to air attack ads of their own before an election.

If conservatives DON'T, and simply choose to play by the rules... then no one can simply fault them for pointing out the laws Democrats inisted on in the first place.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 04:02 AM
You all are correct. Lie is too strong a word to use when characterizing Moore's film; and it is the wrong word to use. A more appropriate word could be "message." The biggest message both parties want us to see.

It just seems to me that by apearing to shutdown the movie, the ostensibly anti-Moore faction is generating a great deal of interest in the film. Almost as if they wanted us to see it.

BTW, I too am looking forward to seeing the film. I love a good documentary.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 06:11 AM

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
His film is obviously biased, and, considering that he celebrated its premier with Democrats in Washington, its aimed to achieve an effect. So... by even lenient standards, it falls under the restrictions of the McCain Feingold bill...

I totally get the politics, or reason for the law behind it...but watching any of the F911 ads....where's the attack? A clip of Bush on a golf course is an attack ad? It's an ad for a movie. Granted, the movie is anti-Bush...but the ad? Does it say Vote Kerry or even Bush bad? It doesn't say anything. I also noticed he just replaced the Bush on golf course clip with shots of Mike Moore walking around Washington. Again, where's the attack as far as the ad is concerned?

If they want to get technical about implied messages...then that's a whole new can of worms. Should the Reagen Coin ads be taken off the air?

But Moore said it best last night on the Daily Show.

If any right wing groups are listening, please, please attack me some more. You're all on my Christmas card list now.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 10:30 AM
Here is a review of Fahrenheit 911 from Jeff Jarvis's blog, which includes links to other opinions, including one, I believe, from The Times. He's far from complimentary. There's sure to be different opinions to this one - unless it's a total dog of a film.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 10:40 AM
HOwdy yall i can see the reasons behind the ads being taken off the air. I can see where both sides are commin from. But its quite ironic if ya think about it the liberal supreme court made this completely ridiculous ruling (imo it violates the constitution but thats for another dicussion) and the ruling is stopping a very liberal movie from advertising.

Also i am really pissed off. I am a strong conservative in reguards to the war and 911. And i would probly disagree with alot of what the movie was all about. I really wanted to see this movie tho. LIke i was takin off of work to go and see it as early as possible. I just bought the other micheal moore film bowling for columbine and i actually thought it was a great movie. THe thing that really makes me mad tho is that the movie is not playin within 50 miles of where im living or even at my parents house in NC. Makes me mad i cant see it when really want to.

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 11:03 AM
some more info and discussions ...

and here :

posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 11:16 AM
All these attempts to shut down this movie (threatening movie theater owners, the NC-17 rathing, this ad thing, etc) are coming awfully close to violating freedom of speech. Wait, scratch that. It's gone beyond that line. Ok it's a political what? Moore's even admitted that it's one-sided. It shows the facts and takes HIS position. I didn't see this much resistance to that stupid Jesus movie.

I tell ya, these people (you know who I'm talking about) have gone nuts. I mean trying to keep the movie from playing in theaters....what's that? To use one of their own idiotic terms....that's just plain un-American. Let people make up their own minds...

[edit on 6/25/2004 by Flinx]

new topics

top topics


log in