JUST AS the days get warmer with the coming of summer, political rhetoric heats up with the coming of elections. In an ongoing debate better described as an all-out verbal war, Democrats and Republicans alike spin truth at their whim in a climacteric attempt to persuade swing voters to vote for their candidates. Recently, the political scene has been especially heated up with the release of Michael Moore's documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11." While the movie is more slanted than a ski slope, the right-wing media's hypocritical criticism of Michael Moore and his film has crossed a river I like to call Ridiculous.
First of all, many of the criticisms thrown at Moore involve the fact that his documentary was one-sided. It is important to note that Moore had no intention of presenting an objective documentary of the war in Iraq. His point of view was strictly from a non-Democrat anti-war stance (if you think that Michael Moore is a big Democrat, take a second look at how he portrayed the Democrats in his film and the fact that he supported Nader in 2000). Therefore, Moore is not manipulating anyone, because he has made no secret of his bias, and unlike Fox News (owned by the ultra-conservative Rupert Murdoch), does not claim to be "fair and balanced," making him at least more honest than some of his critics.
After months of watching Fox News and MSNBC attack Moore with many claims, both substantiated and not, it's also hard to overlook the fact that many of Moore's critics have admittedly not even seen his movie. In fact, the criticism against Michael Moore started months before its release. Given this not-so-subtle bias against Moore, one has to wonder who the real manipulator is here: A man who capitalizes on his freedom of (admittedly) far left expression, or a supposedly "fair and balanced" news agency that rebukes a left-wing critic of President Bush before even hearing his story? Furthermore, it's upsetting that Fox News in particular has dedicated large amounts of time to ad hominem attacks against Moore, time that could be spent on other more important issues, such as the ongoing failure to provide Americans with healthcare or even adequate education.
Regardless, the right-wing media has not only failed, but refused to provide an effective rebuttal to Michael Moore's assertions. The Beltway Boys claimed that Moore exaggerated President Bush's ties to the bin Laden family, but stopped short of gracing us with evidence to prove their point. Bill O'Reilly repeatedly asserts that "Fahrenheit 9/11" is full of lies and inaccuracies, and evidences this point by saying thatMoore is "unpatriotic" and "un-American," an assault conservatives are ready to levy upon any dissenter. Criticisms of Moore or any individual are accepted in this country as freedom of speech, and rightfully so, but empty assertions that are devoid of evidence are unconvincing and irresponsible.
Although I don't particularly agree with Moore's assertions, and especially his delivery of these assertions, I'm more disappointed by the criticisms he has thus far received. Generally, his critics have called him a "nutcase," "un-American" and "unpatriotic," when an ideal response would be to make a conservative documentary on the war in Iraq, offering the other viewpoint.
In a time where objective news is about as realistic as a quick trip to the DMV, the word "propaganda" is thrown at any attempt to express an opinion, regardless of whether that opinion is conservative or liberal. And in all honesty, Moore's fanatic one-sidedness would be a complete turn-off in a perfect world. But in this world, where the media's objectivity has been trampled on by financial motives, and where the Ministry of Truth's -- ahem, Fox News's -- "fair and balanced" reports are perpetually one-sided, Moore's film is at worst a piece of counter-propaganda, and at best, a breath of fresh air.
Sina Kian is a Cavalier Daily columnist. He can be reached at skian@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
