Faked headline in Farenheit 9/11?
I haven't seen Fheit 9/11 yet. I'm glad it's having some sort of impact that will help boot Bush out. But, I am concerned with the reports of questionable accuracy in the movie. Found this in our local paper this morning. Apparently, there's a flash of our local paper, dated Dec 11,2001 in the movie with the headline "LATEST FLORIDA RECOUNT SHOWS GORE WON ELECTION." After much combing through of that particular issue, no such headline is to be found. As of yesterday, none of Moore's staff had returned calls to my local paper.
I'm anxious to hear the explanation. Perhaps one of our film/history/social science buffs could explain this to me: It's my understanding that a good documentary can be powerful in its ability to sway opinion. But at what point does persuasion become propaganda? And is it acceptable for propaganda to complete alter the truth? I mean, I believe that the Bush admin is a total propaganda machine, but it's such a bummer to see someone I'd like to have confidence in look like he's resorted to the same. Christopher Hitchens did a brutal deconstruction of MM and the film, in which he made the following statement:
Here we glimpse a possible fusion between the turgid routines of MoveOn.org and the filmic standards, if not exactly the filmic skills, of Sergei Eisenstein or Leni Riefenstahl.I was pretty intrigued, if ultimately dismissive, of Hitchens' piece when I first read it. Now I'm wondering....