by Derek—2004.07.13 @ 0727
Journalism that exploits, distorts, or exaggerates the news to create sensations and attract readers.
Michael Moore's movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11", has received a lot of attention when it was released, and is one of the highest-grossing "documentary" films to date. The question many people have framed is whether or not the film actually qualifies as a documentary or simply as a political statement.
I have always liked documentaries because of the un-biased approach they strive to take to uncover a story, or simply to tell the "facts" in a simple, unobstructed manner. One issue Moore's film has raised is the efficacy of the news broadcast. Several long-term news reporters, including Ted Koppel and Tom Brokaw, are chiming in:
I worry that too many people are going to start taking that as gospel when indeed I know for a fact that there are things in that movie that a little bit of careful reporting could have corrected. But I don't think [Moore] was altogether interested in getting it straight down the middle. He was interested in making a political statement, and he did it very well.
In Europe, the film is also doing well in the box office, yet Moore's antics and politics are not. It seems Moore is enjoying his success by trying the same tactics with other nations abroad.
The funny thing about box office success is that it doesn't tell the whole story and often warps reality. Just because a thing "sells well" doesn't mean success on all metrics. In theatre, as well as movies, hype can drives attendance but it is often fleeting. Human tendency to "gawk and awe" at the bizarre is almost unstoppable. In fact, whenever a group tries to ban or censor something, it often has the opposite intended effect.
In any case, I am willing to let Moore alone. It reminds me of a two-year-old trantrum: the more you pay attention, the more he screams. Eventually, however, a screaming adult will find himself alone and miserable with no one to complain to but himself.