<p>Broadcast TV follows different rules for what it can say politically, golani, which you should know. The airwaves belong to the public, not the independent network, and they agree to a fairness doctrine in exchange for the privilege of making money off of them. Movies, books, newspapers, even cable do not have the same restrictions.</p>
<p>Plus, I don’t see anyone here calling for government censorship, but for accuracy and fairness.</p>
<p>Listen, we all watched, incredulously, as Bush sat there, like a deer in the headlights, and read “My Pet Goat” for nine or whatever extra minutes, as the country was being attacked.</p>
<p>That is a fact, taped, much to the adminsitration’s chagrin.</p>
<p>Where are these rules about fairness. When are they enforced on PBS. Whatabout on CBS and dan rather presenting falsified documents. Howcome thee standards of fairnes exist against concervatives. This movie may be stupid, but it legally has a every rite to air just like michael moores 2 hours of trash had a rite to be played in theatres and if a network had picked it up, i would imagine not many conservatives would be calling for it to be dropped off the air</p>
<p>LOL! “i would imagine not many conservatives would be calling for it to be dropped off the air.”</p>
<p>I never ever heard such ranting as the anti-Moore diatribes from conservatives! It was constant!</p>
<p>The problem with Path to 9/11 is that while it is being advertised more or less as a “true” story, many of the film’s elements are entirely fictionalized.</p>
<p>Rite there was ranting about how innacurate and factually incorrect moore’s film was and that it basically was all made up. Bush wasnt sending lawyers after moore for defaming him or for libel. No one was calling for the film to be censored. With this film there is ranting, rightfully, from liberals, but they go a step forward to nock it off the air using lawyers and such. Also no conservatives are defending the merits of this film and people like oreilly have said that this film is wrong.</p>
<p>Most of the real footage from Moore’s film can’t be disputed. When you get it on tape, facts speak for themselves.</p>
<p>The poetic license he used in connecting the clips…well, you can dispute that, but the clips themselves…nope.</p>
<p>what you have is a movie that says it based on the 9-11 commission report and you hace 9-11 commisioners saying there are many inaccuracies, fake scenes, bad history, etc…even ABC says there is fabrication, so how much is true or not</p>
<p>as well, alot was filmed in Canada…to save $$$…</p>
<p>As well, when you are using a film that has misinformation as an educational tool in schools, what is the purpose, if you are presenting it as factual</p>
<p>They need to say, well, this seen around the house is made up</p>
<p>But hey, you can believe what you want…it is the idea ABC claimed it was based on a government report and it wasn’t…truth helps, don['t you think</p>
<p>I dont understand the problem. The movie is obviously a innacurate. ABC itself admitted it, but why is it not allowed to air? Because it attacks liberals? No one is arguing about the films accuracy but whether or not it can air. Michael Moore’s film was also fiction but no one tried censoring it.</p>
<p>golani, you are simply inaccurate here. The outcry was focused on the fact that ABC advertised the show as a true story, based on the facts from the 9/11 Commission Report, when it was not. And not only was the show inaccurate, but it was inaccurate in material ways. It wasn’t minor things such as having Atta on the wrong airline from Maine, which only the airlines would care about. The show fabricated an entire scene that is inflamatory in the extreme, and is undisputably false. </p>
<p>You don’t seem to grasp the difference between this show, and Michael Moore’s. Moore’s work was not on the public airways, was not marketed to schools as a factual account for historical purposes, did not claim to be based on a third party governmental work, and - this is important - Moore narrated his movie. In other words, he kept the personal voice in, so that at no time does the viewer lose sight of the fact that this is a personal compilation. </p>
<p>The only reason many people - not just the liberals you constantly cite, but also many conservatives and Republicans - wanted the show scrapped, was that ABC had not agreed to delete the false scene.</p>
<p>Why do you think that liberals hate America?</p>
<p>Michale moores film was false and inflammatory. He was wrong the whole way through and not just some minor crap. ABC admitted alot of it was false so what is the problem. Why should the liberals be able to scrap whatever film they like. Who gave them the stamp to decide</p>
<p>No one gave liberals “the stamp to decide”, which is why the ABC show is still going on the air.</p>
<p>You seem a tad irrational to me, so goodbye.</p>
<p>"Listen, we all watched, incredulously, as Bush sat there, like a deer in the headlights, and read “My Pet Goat” for nine or whatever extra minutes, as the country was being attacked.</p>
<p>That is a fact, taped, much to the adminsitration’s chagrin."</p>
<p>And you obviously KNEW what was exactly happening during those minutes, as much as YOU knew that the country HAD BEEN attacked. </p>
<p>The infinite wisdom of some is astounding!</p>
<p>1)‘Farenheit 9/11’ WAS dropped by its distributor, Disney (ABC)
2)The TV movie, ‘The Reagans’ WAS dropped by its network CBS</p>
<p>Were right wingers outraged by this ‘censorship’, or did they encourage it?</p>
<p>This was not censorships, this was the distrubator doing what is good for business. In this case clinton is getting his lawyers involved whereas last time bush and cheney didnt have their legal team working on it</p>
<p>It’s funny because I don’t have much time to watch TV and never in a million years would I spend those few hours of TV time watching something like this. However, because of the objections by liberals, I’m going to TiVo this show and watch it someday. There are others like Ann Althouse who feel the same. </p>
<p>I think ABC executed a masterful PR/marketing campaign.</p>
<p>yeah like cheney has never used lawyers…make me laugh</p>
<p>hm…i dont really know what that means</p>
<p>Xig, I had no idea what was happening, but our dear president did. He just didn’t <em>do</em> anything for quite a few minutes, which was really odd behavior during a national catastrophe when we were being attacked (which he did know, during that time). Do something! Show some leadership! But sit there and read My Pet Goat? Puhleeze.</p>
<p>What would you have suggested for him to do. He came to a school to read children a book. He did nothing wrong. Even the teacher of the classroom said that. Should he have simply run out of the classroom. Had he done that you people would have jumped on him for freaking out a whole classroom of kids who were sitting and having a great time because the president visited them. He finished the task at hand and he showed incredible calm while doing so. He is the kind of man i want to be a leader that doesnt freak out when he hears something.</p>