Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
Occupy Wall Street
Log In to post a reply
109 messages
View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

hito
hito
1745 posts

Re: Occupy Wall Street

cyberpainter wrote:

You mean he has an "empire" because he's creating films that are successful and making money, therefore he's not to be trusted?


Well I think I have made a number of points about the integrity of Moore so this is a bit simplistic. I think is financial gain from his films and books does need to be considered because:

a) he does have to make a successful product for financial reasons. He is not just asking questions like you or me. The whole framing of the questions and answers has a financial consideration. Bill OíRielly would probably claim he is just asking questions but we know he belongs to a media organisation that makes money (and influences people who will financially feed his corporations agenda) due to the framing of the questions and answers.
b) Moore is rich. In part, his wealth leaves his message open to question as the things he asks of those he exposes, he does not ask of himself. Now I donít know where you draw the line but I am pretty sure he is over most peopleís line when it comes to money. His children are privately educated, he lives in a wealthy area, he charges a lot of money to speak etc. I think it is difficult to be rich and demand that others curb their wealth.
This is not to say that Moore is completely untrustworthy. I am sure that he believes most of what he says and would favour the redistribution of wealth and power from the rich to workers to some extent. He is just like a number of liberals who are obscenely wealthy but have an armchair and arms length humanitarian side to them.

Oct 13, 2011, 04:07



________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Topic Outline: