Quote:
|
Originally Posted by onetime2
Hmmm, I wonder where all the liberal outrage that blossomed around Michael Moore's claims of censorship when his Fahrenheit 9/11 wasn't immediately picked up is in this case?
I do no think this is censorship just as I do not think Moore's claims were. But those who did claim censorship before should be consistent in their application of labels. Will anyone stand up and be counted?
|
How about this then?
Quote:
TV channel goes cold on Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11
By Los Angeles Times
October 21, 2004
Michael Moore's scathing anti-Bush documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 won't make it to television before the US election after all. The television channel In Demand has cancelled a "Michael Moore pre-election special" scheduled for November 1, during which the film was to have aired.
The Fellowship Adventure Group, which is handling Moore's documentary, is contemplating legal action maintaining that the pay-per-view service violated its contract. Proceeds from the broadcast were to go to the Fallen Heroes Fund.
In Demand, which is owned by Time Warner, Comcast and Cox Communications, said the move was in response to "legitimate business and legal concerns", calling any legal action "entirely baseless and groundless".
-Los Angeles Times
|
REF:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...html?from=top5
My point is that the "liberals" (and why is that a negative term?) and the conservatives can
both whine about their shows being cancelled.
Personally, I think the anti-Kerry one was a bit more insidious, as it was dressed up as a documentary, whilst everyone knows Moore has an agenda, but that's just my opinion.
Mr Mephisto