NationStates Jolt Archive

I just read this article on Moore's new project, 'Sicko'. I think it's a bit much to ask people to not talk with the guy. They're not helping themselves a whole lot by clamming up, it makes them seem like they have something they want to hide.

I'd like to think that I'd be free to talk with a documentarian about my work, for any reason.

What about you? Do you think it's heavyhanded or draconian to demand official silence from employees, or is it business as usual? Why?

And now the article:


"Watch out for Michael Moore, say drug companies"

LOS ANGELES - At least six drug companies in the U.S. have warned their employees to watch out for director Michael Moore, who is making a film about the country's health-care system.

The firms expect that Moore may try to stage ambush interviews, a technique he has used in the past for his film and television work.

"We ran a story in our online newspaper saying Moore is embarking on a documentary – and if you see a scruffy guy in a baseball cap, you'll know who it is," Stephen Lederer, a spokesman for Pfizer Global Research and Development, told the Los Angeles Times newspaper.

The film, called Sicko, will likely land in theatres in 2006.

Companies like GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca have also instructed employees not to answer questions posed by Moore, but to redirect them to each company's communications department.

"Moore's past work has been marked by negativity, so we can only assume [Sicko] won't be a fair and balanced portrayal," said Rachel Bloom, executive director of corporate communications for AstraZeneca.

"His movies resemble docudramas more than documentaries."

Moore's filmography includes movies like Fahrenheit 9/11, Bowling for Columbine and Roger & Me.

Although he has never made a feature about health care before, it is not a new subject for him.

Both of his TV shows, TV Nation and The Awful Truth, aired memorable segments on the topic, one of which compared the health-care system of the U.S. unfavourably to that of Cuba and Canada.

Moore chose the topic because it is a "hot-button issue."

"Being screwed by your [health-care provider] and ill-served by pharmaceutical companies is the shared American experience," Moore told the Times.

Moore also told the newspaper that, contrary to rumour, he has not paid any doctors to install secret cameras in their offices.

"I didn't need to. So many doctors have offered to help, for free, in an effort to expose the system," he said.

So am I the only one that found it hilarious that someone said "Moore is not fair and balanced" ?

So am I the only one that found it hilarious that someone said "Moore is not fair and balanced" ?

he's not, but then so much of the shit we're fed by our 'news' media is swung the other way that someone needs to kick the ball from the other side. otherwise it just isnt cricket

I'd like to think that I'd be free to talk with a documentarian about my work, for any reason.

What about you? Do you think it's heavyhanded or draconian to demand official silence from employees, or is it business as usual? Why?

I would speak to a documentarian about my work, but not Michael Moore.

No matter what you said to Moore, he would twist it however he wanted. You wouldn't be represented fairly at all. Why talk to someone who won't even honestly convey your view in his film?

Have a look at Charlton Heston's speech. Conveniently enough, after a little cutaway shot of the audience, Heston's tie and the background miraculously change colour!! Handy to be able to change clothes in the middle of a paragraph!

I would speak to a documentarian about my work, but not Michael Moore.

No matter what you said to Moore, he would twist it however he wanted. You wouldn't be represented fairly at all. Why talk to someone who won't even honestly convey your view in his film?

Have a look at Charlton Heston's speech. Conveniently enough, after a little cutaway shot of the audience, Heston's tie and the background miraculously change colour!! Handy to be able to change clothes in the middle of a paragraph!


clarke kent could do it. why not charlton heston? are you saying he's less than a superman?

I'd use a bunch of deliberately staged comments that would only paint a rosy picture of my company. Make him not use me.

Michael Moore may be a manipulative, fat POS, but this issue could use some of his guerilla style tactics. I don't think anyone here would argue that the drug companies are bigger, more manipulative POS...
Treating like with like should be amusing and perhaps eyeopening.
The FDA is no longer looking out for us since it's been hijacked by the drug companies, and could use an enema.
I wouldn't pay to see one of his films, but I'll gladly download a copy via P2P.

Companies are so dumb. They should offer employees massive bonuses if they make positive comments about the company which appear in the documentary.

Michael Moore may be a manipulative, fat POS, but this issue could use some of his guerilla style tactics. I don't think anyone here would argue that the drug companies are bigger, more manipulative POS...
Treating like with like should be amusing and perhaps eyeopening.
The FDA is no longer looking out for us since it's been hijacked by the drug companies, and could use an enema.
I wouldn't pay to see one of his films, but I'll gladly download a copy via P2P.

Amen. The damn pharma sector is the most profitable one, of them all. Yet companies generally show a high disregard for their costumers. Its not that the profit margins of medical products are pornografic (you may justify that because you can say you need the money to research), but companies are prone to a) launch products with absolute no relevance b) launch products which have not been tested properly, and in some cases, result in death c) take advantage of general public ignorance to their profit

The firms expect that Moore may try to stage ambush interviews, a technique he has used in the past for his film and television work.

"We ran a story in our online newspaper saying Moore is embarking on a documentary – and if you see a scruffy guy in a baseball cap, you'll know who it is," Stephen Lederer, a spokesman for Pfizer Global Research and Development, told the Los Angeles Times newspaper.
Surely that means they're going to be afraid to talk to 90% of the male American population?

They missed out fat, incidently.

If the only way you can effectively get across a message in america is through manipulation (and it is from what everyone can see) than so be it Michael Moore basically portrays things from the other perspective, which is good since no one else seems to be doing it very well.

So am I the only one that found it hilarious that someone said "Moore is not fair and balanced" ?

Yeah, I'm sure that Michael Moore doesn't even watch Fox News, so only the right-wing will get this one.

he's not, but then so much of the shit we're fed by our 'news' media is swung the other way that someone needs to kick the ball from the other side. otherwise it just isnt cricket

Uhhh, Fox News already did just that. It's around to give a right spin on things to counterbalance the left spin of most of the other media. Everyone is full of shit, no matter what the side

I think that most people who work for any organization, company, etc., are familiar with Michael Moore, and they don't need to be told not to speak to him. It's quite well established that he will film his interview with you, and then take selected segments of it and put only the most unflattering parts in a film - combined with other interviews in a context that will make you look like a fool.

Then he'll call it a documentary.

While I have respect for some of his ideas, I don't have any respect for his filmmaking. There are far, far too many holes in his hypotheses, and the rather obvious unflattering editing makes me doubt most of what he says nowadays.

He was much better in the days when he was running that TV show of his.

Dobbs Town: Link?

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

I think that most people who work for any organization, company, etc., are familiar with Michael Moore, and they don't need to be told not to speak to him. It's quite well established that he will film his interview with you, and then take selected segments of it and put only the most unflattering parts in a film - combined with other interviews in a context that will make you look like a fool.

Then he'll call it a documentary.

While I have respect for some of his ideas, I don't have any respect for his filmmaking. There are far, far too many holes in his hypotheses, and the rather obvious unflattering editing makes me doubt most of what he says nowadays.

He was much better in the days when he was running that TV show of his.
even if you dont respect his filmmaking, the american health care system deserves this more than anyone.

even if you dont respect his filmmaking, the american health care system deserves this more than anyone.

The fact that the American health care system is unfair, full of greed, and generally "a bad thing" doesn't make me want to run out and see any more Moore. I'd rather try and vote in someone who will do something about it than pay 8 bucks to a lard ass.

Dobbs Town: Link?

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

Ask and ye shall receive.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/arts/national/2004/12/23/Arts/moore041223.html





(I hadn't initially included a link to the article, 'cause I'd already done so with a few other threads, and didn't want anyone to accuse me of just 'cutting-and-pasting' a bunch of news articles for the sake of using bandwidth. My bad.)

So am I the only one that found it hilarious that someone said "Moore is not fair and balanced" ?

You see, the term fair and balanced is actually corporate speak for not condusive to a healthy profit margin. So no, I'm not shocked.

Uhhh, Fox News already did just that. It's around to give a right spin on things to counterbalance the left spin of most of the other media. Everyone is full of shit, no matter what the side
Why can't the US media just try to be objective? Why do Americans automatically assume that everything must have a political spin or agenda?

Why can't the US media just try to be objective? Why do Americans automatically assume that everything must have a political spin or agenda?

Because they've become used to the idea that news is partisan propoganda, so they now expect it of all news media.

Sad, isn't it?

Because they've become used to the idea that news is partisan propoganda, so they now expect it of all news media.

Sad, isn't it?
Because only the daily show is objective or at the least the most ovjective.

The fact that the American health care system is unfair, full of greed, and generally "a bad thing" doesn't make me want to run out and see any more Moore. I'd rather try and vote in someone who will do something about it than pay 8 bucks to a lard ass.
no one is going to do shit about it unless some one informs the public

I would speak to a documentarian about my work, but not Michael Moore.

No matter what you said to Moore, he would twist it however he wanted. You wouldn't be represented fairly at all. Why talk to someone who won't even honestly convey your view in his film?

Have a look at Charlton Heston's speech. Conveniently enough, after a little cutaway shot of the audience, Heston's tie and the background miraculously change colour!! Handy to be able to change clothes in the middle of a paragraph!

I watched the same interview, and no such thing happened. All Michael Moore did was ask Charleston Heston some straightfoward questions about bring an NRA rally to the town where a girl was recently killed in a school shooting. If Charley had nothing bad to hide about the incident, what's wrong with an interview?

Would it be an "ambush interview" if Michael Moore had asked Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin why they killed millions of innocent people? No, Charleston Heston didn't kill millions of people, but thats not what Michael Moore was asking him, either.

I watched the same interview, and no such thing happened. All Michael Moore did was ask Charleston Heston some straightfoward questions about bring an NRA rally to the town where a girl was recently killed in a school shooting.

Speech, not interview.

Although there were dodgy things about that interview too, I was referring to Charlton Hestons speech.

Why can't the US media just try to be objective? Why do Americans automatically assume that everything must have a political spin or agenda?

Because our "news" agencies are now all corpratised. It used to be that you never questioned the news. Now you have to research what they say and you have to look to other nations to see what they don't tell you.

For example, the War In Iraq is HEAVILY censored. Other counties show fighting, we don't. The goverment learned from Viet Nam that you can't keep a war going when you show battle film and casualties.....

So am I the only one that found it hilarious that someone said "Moore is not fair and balanced" ?

*snort* Who is these days?

no one is going to do shit about it unless some one informs the public

Well, for starters, I don't want to have to pay for Michael Moore's healthcare.

He looks like he couldn't run to the end of the block. And it looks like his diet consists of cheese fries, chili dogs, and gallons of sugary drinks.

I guess I've been wasting my time running over 50 miles per week, eating right and taking care of my body so I won't be a fat lard ass corpulent burden on society.

I should really take up smoking, and eating at McDonald's all the time if everyone else is going to pay for my stupidity.

It wouldn't be a fair documentary if we didn't interview Moore's friends and relatives and ask them what and how much he crams into his piehole every day.

Healthcare firms in America are guilty of being involved in criminal acts like deliberate illicit, unjustified price gouging. I have zero sympathy for them. I have already been monitoring the problem.

Well, for starters, I don't want to have to pay for Michael Moore's healthcare.

He looks like he couldn't run to the end of the block. And it looks like his diet consists of cheese fries, chili dogs, and gallons of sugary drinks.

I guess I've been wasting my time running over 50 miles per week, eating right and taking care of my body so I won't be a fat lard ass corpulent burden on society.

I should really take up smoking, and eating at McDonald's all the time if everyone else is going to pay for my stupidity.

It wouldn't be a fair documentary if we didn't interview Moore's friends and relatives and ask them what and how much he crams into his piehole every day.

It says a lot when your only insult against Moore is "He's fat, lollerskates!"

Uhhh, Fox News already did just that. It's around to give a right spin on things to counterbalance the left spin of most of the other media. Everyone is full of shit, no matter what the side
That whole "leftist media" thing is a joke. The commercial media serves the dollar, not some political movement, and because of this 99% of the time they represent only the most centrist and/or government approved positions.

Do any of the 'tards who endlessly repeat this canard even know where it comes from? Some right-wingers did a survey of reporters and found that they tend to be in favor of legal abortion and a few other "liberal" issues than against them. Big deal. They defined anything to the left of Hitler as "liberal", took a small sampling of anecdotes, and made some crazy assumptions because they wanted the "research" to fit their facts. Their methodology would have gotten a D- in a high-school science class.

Because our "news" agencies are now all corpratised. It used to be that you never questioned the news. Now you have to research what they say and you have to look to other nations to see what they don't tell you.

For example, the War In Iraq is HEAVILY censored. Other counties show fighting, we don't. The goverment learned from Viet Nam that you can't keep a war going when you show battle film and casualties.....

After all, not everyone sees winning as being more important then living people...

Well, for starters, I don't want to have to pay for Michael Moore's healthcare.
Nice straw man, making Moore's health the issue. He's a millionaire, he pays for his own medical care.

Like Moore, I don't want Government medical care; I want the best and I'll pay for it. But I am not one of the millions of elderly people and parents trying to live on a few hundred dollars a month.

Nice straw man, making Moore's health the issue. He's a millionaire, he pays for his own medical care.

Like Moore, I don't want Government medical care; I want the best and I'll pay for it. But I am not one of the millions of elderly people and parents trying to live on a few hundred dollars a month.
You missed the point. Moore is in favor of government run health care. That's what the documentary is going to favor. Hence, that is the issue.

You missed the point. Moore is in favor of government run health care. That's what the documentary is going to favor. Hence, that is the issue.

And everyone ignored my post, in which I said "it's sad that your only comment is 'he's fat, lollerskates!'"

And everyone ignored my post, in which I said "it's sad that your only comment is 'he's fat, lollerskates!'"
How about since he's fat socialized health care means we're putting more into his pot than he is into ours?

How about since he's fat socialized health care means we're putting more into his pot than he is into ours?

And yet, earlier, it was revealed that he was in fact quite wealthy. So it sounds like he would contribute quite a bit to the pot himself.

Michael Moore is the leftist equivalent of a fundamentalist Christian. He's got a doctrine and dogma that he follows.

He has an irrational fear of corporations and George Bush. And he's a prick, just like so many fundamentalist Christians. He truly does hate anyone of the conservative stripe.

He's willing to lie and slander other people's reputations so as to increase his own personal rep and pocketbook. And because he's a big name some people will believe whatever he says.

He only shows part of the picture, the part that fits his argument, he acts much like so many of the ideologues on these forums, who just brush over anything contradictory.

And now he's going after one of the most innovative and positive sectors of our economy. The Pharmaceutical companies are slick and streamlined, they improve our lives on a daily basis. They pour loads of cash into R&D so as to allow us to have the newest and best medicines available, even though they could just sit there and do nothing all day long and live off of the profits from Viagra.

Do you wonder why the price for medicine is high? It's simple, it took an absolutely huge amount of money to develop and approve all of these drugs. And some of them are only needed by a very limited market.

The Pharmaceutical industry is the most regulated industry in the United States. They have to pass FDA scrutiny for all their drugs and the government always has a watchful eye on them. Safety commissions stalk their facilities and all sorts of stuff. People may bring up the recent problems with Vioxx and the like, but the studies that found them harmful were incredibly flawed, but the media hitched onto these studies and now we have a panic.