Disney's Dubious Path to 9/11

[mousepod]

I'm wondering if anyone watched part 1 last night. I recorded it, but opted to watch the Fox animation lineup instead. One thing I found odd - my local ABC HD station didn't show it in widescreen - so I grabbed a widescreen copy from the BBC airing - I wonder if it's the pre-edited version...

[scaeagles]

I was watching Manning vs. Manning on Sunday night football.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I was watching Manning vs. Manning on Sunday night football.

You and the rest of the country. The ABC "special" was thoroughly trounced in the ratings. I know I played my part in not watching. I also heard, but I'm hoping someone can confirm, that the one or two advertisers for tonight's installment have pulled out.

[cirquelover]

I've never read the 9-11 commission report but the history channel has a show on today about it. It looks like I should watch it.
No I didn't watch the abc show last night. I'm tired of all the fictionalization on tv of real events.

[Gn2Dlnd]

Yesterday afternoon I decided to not spend a chunk of my life watching this thing that I didn't want to watch in the first place. My reasoning was that newswatchers who I read would, and would post the discrepancies about which I was most interested. My other decision was to use my Tivo to send a message to ABC/Disney. Apparently Tivo usage information is gathered and used for ratings purposes. I used the "thumbs down" function on the show, applied my valuable Tivo recording space on things I like, and went about my day.

Today is a work day for me, I don't have much time to spend on this subject. Tomorrow or the next day I have some thoughts on this mess, and in particular, the "Fahrenheit 9/11" vs. "Path to 9/11" straw man argument.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Gn2Dlnd

the "Fahrenheit 9/11" vs. "Path to 9/11" straw man argument.

I never did see Fahrenheit 911, can someone bring me up to speed. The Path to 9/11 contains numerous scenes that are not just inaccurate but patently false and made up. Is the same true about Fahrenheit 911? I understood it was unflattering, disrespectful and possibly taken out of context but did the movie make up facts and blatenly revise history?

[wendybeth]

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a documentary. The crap they showed last night is not. F9/11 was released nationwide in theaters, giving people the option to see it or not. 'The Path to 9/11' was produced for ABC to be shown only on ABC and purports to be a 'docudrama', which basically covers all the bases. Not only were they presenting this pile of merde as truth, they also teamed up with Scholastic to release a discussion guide to be used in America's classrooms.

[Moonliner]

I'm not sure I follow you on this post.

Originally Posted by wendybeth

F9/11 was released nationwide in theaters, giving people the option to see it or not.

How did the fact that "path" was on ABC effect my option to watch it or not? I still choose not to watch it as apparently the overwhelming percentage of Americans did also.

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a documentary. The crap they showed last night is not.

How is the format (documentary, docudrama, drama, whatever) important? Each film either made up facts or it did not. Did Fahrenheit 9/11 create it's own facts like path did? My understanding is that Mr. Moore went out of his way to embarrass the president and certainly took some things out of context but overall what was shown was factual. Is that right?


Oh and on a side note, I read yesteraday that scholatic has dropped it's support for the show.

[wendybeth]

I believe you are correct in your assessment of F9/11, in general. The differences involved are many and myriad, but I suppose the most glaring problems with the ABC show is that they initially indicated that the show was based on the commission report, all the while knowingly altering events and facts under the guise of 'dramatising' some arguably already very dramatic events. They maligned persons living and dead to support a not-so-very veiled agenda, which (despite the commission's Chair Governor Kean's (Rep) asssertions that they also went after Bush where warranted) pretty much slagged everyone in the Clinton admin. They committed outright falsehoods that were withdrawn only after it became public knowledge and the persons who were defamed threatened action. I could go on and on, but it's really a moot point- thankfully, people saw this for what it was and refused to watch this particular peice of propaganda. (Say that three times fast!)

It was presented on network tv, which does have to adhere to certain standards, and presented with minimal commercial backing which makes one wonder how, where and why the money for this event was obtained. It certainly was not an homage to the truth, and many of the principals involved (such as Harvey Keitel) are not real happy to have been involved with such a duplicitous project.

Comparing this to F 9/11 is apples and rocks. I suppose, since this was basically a paid political advertisement, then the equal time rule should come into play and perhaps Mr. Moore should get his film run as well by ABC.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a documentary.

No its not. It is a dramatization and is filled with as many lies and misleading BS as "Path" is purported to have.