Lessig

It is a statement about gulibility, who is and who isn't.

Clearly, it's okay to exaggerate as long as you do so patriotically. If I see that promo: "I'm an American soldier, too" one more time, I think I'm gonna be sick. It's not the line, which is accurate, it's just the way the actress says it which seems to be way of the mark based on Jessica's account. She hid out of fear she'd be shot accidentally.

Good site!!!

CBS should run the Reagan show. It is good to have a different perspective on things. I mean, there are tons of positive Reagan films out there: you can find them in the documentary section. ;)

Note the story of Shoshana Johnson is worth reading - "the other female U.S. POW of the Iraq war, is slated to receive a far smaller disability pension than that granted Jessica Lynch."

Prof. Lessig wrote his piece before the Lynch movie aired. I'm actually watching it now to see how accurate it is, and I have to say it seems mostly correct. It makes a few changes, but gets the spirit right and most of the facts. In that, it was just like what I heard about the Reagan movie: Mostly correct, but some words were changed around while still getting the spirit right.

What Prof. Lessig probably meant is that Lynch denies the early reports about her rescue, for she does and rightly so. But to NBC's credit, they did seem to try for accuracy. And that's why there wasn't much of a fuss over the movie. Now if they had tried to paint the story the way the first news reports did, there should have been a big fuss raised.

Why was a fuss made over the Reagan movie when it apparently contained nothing but information that is in one biograpy or another (even it it contradicted what was in other biographies), while getting the spirit correct even if some words were changed around? Simple: Ideologic war. If you are the right, you cannot allow people to say negative things about Reagan at precisely the time when the Bush administration is trying to ram through many of Reagan's principles. Wouldn't do, so a fuss was orchestrated, and the sheep followed even though not one person protesting had yet seen the Reagan movie.

I was unaware that the Reagan movie was solely based on "Dutch," and having not read the book I cannot comment on its accuracy or lack thereof. I can only go by the script excerpts I have read in the press, all of which matched the Reagan I remember, including his neglect of the AIDS issue for years. Now if Reagan was a Christian, and he was, then he most definitely believed that you reap what you sow, that homosexuality is wrong, and that God would kill sinners. Hardly a stretch from his personal beliefs of that nature to what words are being attributed to him.

She hid out of fear she’d be shot accidentally.

whatever one may think about the "story" surrounding private lynch, one should carefully refrain from disparaging her.

she was a soldier, she was sent half-way around the world to "defend" her country, she was wounded in combat, and she was taken prisoner. she deserves some respect.

getting back on topic, it is non sequitor to associate issues of "free speech" with the broadcast decisions of the major networks.

Law is NOT about the administration of justice as it is about the control of the misuse of power.

this has nothing to do with law, or the administration of justice.

what (properly) motivates nbc, cbs, cnn, and even fox - and more importantly those who purchase advertising time from them - are economic considerations. broadcasting unpopular speech, while healthy for democracy, is in most cases economically irrational.

when the democrats have coherent something to say - which the public also wants to hear - the networks will change color accordingly and the right can go back to complaining about the "liberal" media.

Hollywood plays fast and loose with all sorts of things -- ask a Pole about Enigma.:-| But putting offensive character-revealing words or actions into a real person's role in a script, without a solid basis in fact, seems to be recognized as noteworthy. I judge this in part because that seems to be the part of the story that had legs. It's what percolated out to me, a cynical non-TV-watcher who wasn't much paying attention, even before the show was cancelled, and it also showed up in the newspaper article I saw about the cancellation.

I don't know enough about the Lynch story to make up something parallel there, so I'll try another parallel. If a "biography" of Clinton had him gloating about lying, with no factual justification other than that being the kind of attitude his political opponents inferred from his actions, I would have been comparably disgusted. I would have been similarly disgusted by a biography showing as uncontested fact some misdeed he was accused of but never proved to have done.

I'm no great fan of Reagan, and definitely no fan of Clinton, but I shouldn't have to support someone in general to think that putting offensive words in his mouth is pretty low. (Full disclosure of ethical inconsistency: I'm not sure how I feel about the conflict between this principle and my taste for poetic justice. A script assigning offensive statements and character-revealing actions to a certain network president could have a certain ironic appeal.)

In all these cases, I'm still in the "hell, let them publish (or broadcast, in this case)" school. But I would think of the real show as a far more serious embarrassment for the network than for Reagan, and similarly the hypothetical show as a far more serious embarrassment for the perpetrator than for Clinton.

The idea that political correctness ran to the rescue to save a white male republican (nevermind Ronald Reagan!!) makes me giggle with glee.

Virtually all broadcast television networks are in the business of selling entertainment (perhaps not PBS or C-SPAN or The History Channel). I doubt there is a line on the quarterly reports of CBS, NBC, or ABC labeled "veracity." They are in the business of attracting viewers and renting those eyeballs to advertisers and nothing else.

Bill Maher got cancelled because the advertisers were upset. CBS pulled a reality series based on the Beverly Hillbillies because viewers and sponsors were upset. NBC keeps garbage like "Fear Factor" on because it makes those consituencies happy. "Coupling" gets yanked off because not enough eyeballs were watching.

Lies in the Private Lynch movie made viewers happy. Distortions and additions in the Reagan series did not.

Right Ben, and the patron saints of Liberalism, the Clinton Cartel were the greatest thing to happen to this country in the last 50 years. They never lied under oath, they never sold out this country to the Chinese, they never helped Enron, they never got their buddy, DNC chairman Terry McAuillife to play golf with the global crossing guys and make a few million.

Hey Lessig, if there was a TV movie with your pals Hillary Clinton, or Kucinich, or Edwards or Dean on their deathbed from Alzheimers, and some Republican Operatives wrote a BS screenplay with made up dialog and situations, about these "Heroes" of liberalism - you and the rest of the "I hate Bush, Republicans, people who dont agree with me" would have your "Boycott the movie blogs and .orgs" up and running. Your the cronies from moveon and codepink would show up and you all would have a grand old time "showing those totalitarian fascists what a grass roots movement is". When the right has a problem its censorship. When the left has a problem it is "the right thing to do.

Apparently it is ok to bend the truth, but only in one way.
- thanks for being intellectually honest Larry.

*sigh* How sad is it to see the conservative sheeple baa like their conservative pundits tell them to baa about a movie that NONE OF THEM HAVE SEEN. I see it is becoming accepted wisdom that the Reagan movie contains lies, when in fact every script excerpt published to date has information consistent with the facts. But no, the pundits declare this movie is bad, and the mindless followers bleat, "Bad, bad, bad" even though they haven't even seen the movie.

What ever happened to independent thought in this country? It's all about picking sides now. My side good. Your side bad. Ugh.

I spit on both sides. Think for yourself. See things for yourself. Don't let other people tell you how to think, or what to watch, or what to read. There is no enlightenment that way. Only self-enforced, and reinforced, ignorance.

But go ahead, ignore what I am saying and keep bleating the party line about how this movie, which you haven't seen, contains lies. I'm sure that helps you sleep at night.

You can find the full Nokia 5140 specification here

Thanks for this site,
congratulation and my best wishes!
internetdienste

Backseat bangers Boys first time great superb links Gang Bang Squad
Teens for cash

logotypy
pozycjonowanie

Good job :)

just what i was searching for. Best whises for all <a href="http://www.welivestogether.net">we live together</a> and <a>we live together</a> http://www.welivestogether.net

Thing

When you have owned cheap Habbo credits, you will get large!

I bought the Hellgate gold sword at once.