I happen to agree, in general, with your concern about media conglomerates. However, this story is a silly example.

Is Disney really "blocking" the distribution of this film, more than every other studio which passed on this project? They told Miramax a year ago to stay away from this, for a perfectly plausible reason that has nothing to do with their taxes - they don't want to be involved with a film that will annoy the Red Staters, which are still half of this country (and probably more than half of their customers).

In fact, as the story reports, Miramax is free to find another distributor; this may cut into the Miramax/Moore bottom line, but they aren't worried about that, are they?

Please tell me you understand this to be a phony controversy hyped up by the marketing geniuses at Miramax. And since the Times is playing along (and we are talking about it), it seems to be working.

And when the Times figures out why Jeb Bush might want to punish what may be the largest employer in Florida, I hope they will break that news, too.

Tom- As you said, Disney was afraid to distribute the film for fear of annoying the Red Staters.

I want to make them fear NOT DISTRIBUTING it for fear of annoying us Blue Staters. Boycott and counterboycott.

Sure another distributor might be found, but who knows whether that would have happened if Miramax hadn't backed it to begin with. Miramax wanted to distribute it and corporate censorship stopped it. If there was more diversified ownership, there wouldn't be the same problem of a few folks controlling these decisions.

So I just want the corporate folks to know there will be consequences for corporate cowardice.

As a publicity stunt, I find Weinstein's behavior only mildly annoying - there is nothing happening today with this film that could not have been predicted a year ago, and he surely hopes to get papers like the Times to trumpet his film.

Michael Moore, Academy Award winning producer, can't find a backer for a $6 million Bush bashing project in Hollywood? Please. Weinstein could have backed this himself with a second mortgage on any of his properties.

Pure publicity stunt. Let's boycott every other Hollywood studio, too, since they seemed to have passed on it.

I don't understand. Does Disney have an obligation to distribute _every single thing_ that you want them to? As a business, they have to look out for their long-term interests, and distibuting Moore is just suicide.

If big media conglomerates want to control so much of our media space, they should be treated essentially as common carriers, obligated to carry any ideas or artist willing to hire them.

Which means that as long as there is a likelihood to make money on a deal, they should have to distribute a movie or other media item.

Distributing Moore is quite reasonabl economically. He does well at the box office.

Refusing to carry him for fear of retribution by political officials is a door to de facto censorship. The government can't directly censor the media, but they should be allowed to threaten corporate tax breaks to accomplish the same ends?

I don't think so.

I don't understand how this could be a publicity stunt for Miramax. If Moore has to find another distributor, Miramax will only get a fraction of the profits they otherwise would have realized. Surely the man who single-handedly relaunched the Bush AWOL controversy could scare up enough publicity for a political film released near the election.

This is the same Miramax that backed The Quiet American, then refused to release it. They sacrificed millions in ticket sales to avoid offending anyone with the truth about America's entry into Vietnam. The result of Miramax's making and refusing to release the film was that the film got very little in the way of publicity, so most people are only vaguely aware that it ever existed. Some publicity stunt.

I don't think that the motivation is appeasement for Bush backers, either. Disney already gets hit with repeated boycotts over their gay-friendly marketing and benefits programs. Associating themselves with Moore can't tick the boycotters off more than Disney already has.

Saying that Miramax has no obligation to follow through simply ignores the realities of modern film distribution. Moore can find another distributor, but Miramax sabotaged that effort with their initial backing. They will no doubt demand some of the profits, making the film less attractive to others.

Studios like Disney contract with theater chains to ensure that their films face minimal competition from independents. Moviegoers, especially in smaller cities, have much less opportunity to see films that are released by independent studios because the locally owned theaters that show them are being crowded out by the chains.

Is it possible that Disney execs started getting back-channel complaints about reading the names of the fallen during Nightline? This may have worried them, with young Powell slapping huge fines on broadcasters and young Bush reigning in the Florida governor's mansion. One thing we know for sure: there won't be much analysis of Disney's motives in the broadcast media.

So this is where the monopolization of media has taken us. Government can use its control of taxes, subsidies, and legislation to intimidate a few media conglomerates into censoring themselves. By allowing these few to control most of the airwaves, government can bypass the constitution and let the media curtail free speech for them.

It's not 100% effective, but it doesn't have to be. By keeping information from most of the people, government can frame the terms of debate, so the public winds up voting on the basis of Kerry's 10 year old position on gas taxes instead of on the basis of the lies and rampant corruption of the Bush administration.

Hollywood is full of leftists who have no idea what they are doing. Their hatred of GWB clouds anything they do or say.
The world does not need another anti Bush message. The America haters already have CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, PBS, The NY Times, Washington Post, Boston Herald and the LA Times to do their dirty work bashing the U.S. Bush and everything good anout America.
Bad news for America is good news for leftists.
Just like the Passion of the Christ Hollywood may be wrong on this one.
Frankly I odn't care if it's released. If I feel like watching biased Bush hating, I'll watch Katie Couric or Dan Rather!

Puff Driver: I'm so sick of hearing you Right Wingers parrotting Rush Limbaugh's complaints about the Liberal/Left Media. Give it a rest. Biased Bush-hating? Are you for real?

Left wing media doesn't exist. NY or LA Times' left wing "agenda" is just made up by people like Ann Coulter, so their message would resonate more among angry conservatives who can't stand the fact that most americans don't actually want to go backt to the 50's or live in a christian theocracy. Get a grip.

Far as this mess goes, i find it strange that they would actually block Moore's film, but then again, it is election year, but Jeb was re- elected already 2002 and i don't think Moore will do that much damage to Bush. His just airing the truths that have existed for a long time, nobody just don't want to hear about them in America.

Katie Couric a leftie? Oh come oooon. Far as i know Dan Rather could be a registered republican and i wouldn't be that surprised.

Left wing media doesn't exist. NY or LA Times' left wing "agenda" is just made up by people like Ann Coulter, so their message would resonate more among angry conservatives who can't stand the fact that most americans don't actually want to go backt to the 50's or live in a christian theocracy. Get a grip.

Far as this mess goes, i find it strange that they would actually block Moore's film, but then again, it is election year, but Jeb was re- elected already 2002 and i don't think Moore will do that much damage to Bush. His just airing the truths that have existed for a long time, nobody just don't want to hear about them in America.

Katie Couric a leftie? Oh come oooon. Far as i know Dan Rather could be a registered republican and i wouldn't be that surprised.

I have an idea. Why don't we distribute the film
ourselves? I have a DVD Writer... I'm sure
and MPG will be on P2P soon... I'll promise to make as many copies and pass them out to as many people as I can if you will do the same! Once this thing starts getting viewed, interest in it
will spread like wildfire (like Bowling for Columbine did). No way are they gonna sit back
and watch their movie's earning potential slip
away like that; they'll have to release it in
theatres! Or am I crazy just? Just an idea...

Im completly disapointed with disney and what micheal eisner has done to it we all remember SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DAWARVES or PETER PAN and PINNNOCIO but eiesner has ruined the once great company and the gay days are a outrage im sure mr disney is spinning in his grave

Im completly disapointed with disney and what micheal eisner has done to it we all remember SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DAWARVES or PETER PAN and PINNNOCIO but eiesner has ruined the once great company and the gay days are a outrage im sure mr disney is spinning in his grave