Free Speech or Abuse of the Press?

[ltdiver 3]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/14/muslim.dvd/index.html

A hate DVD of Muslim extremists being created and distributed by and Israeli opportunist.

I understand he has the right to make this hate filled propaganda tool, but his method of distribution is what I'm taking issue with here. Doesn't our news sources have a responsibility to not create animosity and potential unrest within the population? :^(

Hate does NOT foster peace. Evil just begets evil.

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[quade 4]

It wasn't editorial content. It was an advertising supplement.

The newspapers are no more "responsible" for the information than they are for the content of an advertising supplement about Viagra or Walt Disney World. Don't get me wrong, they absolutely could have reviewed and rejected the "ad," this happens all the time, but to say they have an "responsibility" to make certain the subject matter never appears is going a bit too far. As for causing "animosity and potential unrest within the population," that's a very subjective argument. I'd have to see the material to know if it offended me, but I think we both know people that are offended at even the slightest mention of certain topics. If that's the case here, who is then left to judge?

The line on incitement to violence is going to be something more than simply saying that some Muslims (or even ALL Muslims) are terrorists. It would need to have some sort of call to action on the information.

The "irony" is that it might actually more upset exactly the people it's purporting to be against. Then again, I haven't seen it.

Looking for it on YouTube now.

Starts HERE; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMLJJEDDDGc

Well, the opening 60 seconds tells you it's not about ALL Muslims, just the radial terrorist ones. I don't know how anybody could have missed that part. It also says they are a threat to not only non-muslims, but to non-radical Muslims as well.

So far, I agree with the premise.

Two segments in and so far, I can't disagree with anything I've seen. It's a reasonable, actual, documentary so far.

Segment 3 at 4:19. For the first time in the film we see a (somewhat strange to "western eyes") deference toward Judaism in the sub-titled translation of a jihadist; "G-d." This is a tip off that the producer of the film is pretty sensitive to the conservative Jewish belief that the name of "God" should never be inscribed on something ephemeral. It's interesting because the producer seems to have no issue with spelling out "Allahu," but if he translates that to english (not even Hebrew!) he uses the affectation of "G-d." Then, moments later at 4:32 we see it spelled out "God." Interesting. My "guess" is that there are actually two versions of this entire documentary; one using "G-d" and the other "God" and that the "G-d" I'm seeing in this version is one that didn't get replaced.

Segment 4 at 1:52. Speaking about the hate speech found of Aljazeera and elsewhere in the middle east, but also applies to; The US, Israel, the documentary itself and . . . 1984. Possibly the most ironic lines so far. "If you want to get people to fight, you have to make them think there is a threat and they're in danger." And at 5:27; "When you hear the same message over and over and over again . . . it becomes part of the way you see the world."

Segment 6 at 4:05. Shots of Michael Moore saying "There is no terrorist threat" from (according to the film) October 2003 at University of Michigan. May have been taken out of context. Would require research. My "guess" is the shots are out of contexts and he's speaking about immediate threats (from Iraq) that were frequently being ginned by the DHS "alerts" to 99% of the American population (which was correct).

Segment 6 at 5:08. Context of "you can't negotiate with (terrorists)" by way of association of the Chamberlain/Hitler Munich Agreement.

Segment 7 at 2:24. Preceded by a bit of German history, we see photos of jihadists giving "Nazi Salute." Ok, I'm not sure how often that happens in reality, but the images are clearly designed to scare the Jewish viewers. It may even be a frequent thing, but I really do believe a particular hand gesture isn't really the biggest problem here. These are followed by more parallels being drawn between the jihadists and the Nazis.

Segment 7 at 5:30. Little kid talking about marching into Jerusalem and being a suicide bomber . . . standing in front of pictures of Mickey and Minnie Mouse.

Segment 8 at 0:07. Starting to go off the rails here a little bit with a story about how Jews need the blood of Christians to make . . . . crackers . . . being used as propaganda by jihadist television. While the story is absurd and shows the bizarre propaganda being used in the middle east. I guess there is some Jewish/historical reason why this myth is important to be defended against, but seriously . . . not all that important in the grand scheme of things.

Segment 9 at 4:25. So, what does the world do about it? The film suggests that the vast majority of Muslims that do not agree with the radicals can help by teaching their children peace. That the world can do this through peace and not simply be bombing the crap out of one another.

Ok, after watching the entire thing all I can say is those people that are in an uproar over it being included in a newspaper have no idea what they're talking about. This is a very good and fair documentary. If I were an editor of a newspaper I would have absolutely let this run.

I really don't understand the objections.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[airdvr 210]

From the CNN article:

"It's pretty obvious that the group sponsoring it wants people to think more about terrorism, about national security, about Middle East politics and maybe less about the economy," said Sabato. "Well, that obviously favors one side -- the Republicans."

Nice spin

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Gawain 0]

If they have the funding to buy the "ad space", and the "ad carrier" is willing to distribute it, then I don't think there is much to be done.

So, I think this is free speech.

This is how delicate, yet how indestructible "free speech" is. The words can hurt, but as we've seen with the Phelps family in Kansas free speech has allowed them to spew their craziness, while allowing the rest of us to see how crazy they are and discredit them.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[quade 4]

Quote

From the CNN article:

"It's pretty obvious that the group sponsoring it wants people to think more about terrorism, about national security, about Middle East politics and maybe less about the economy," said Sabato. "Well, that obviously favors one side -- the Republicans."

Nice spin

Well, to a certain extent, it is correct to say that keeping up a certain level of paranoia does benefit the Republicans. Fear of terrorism, blown out of reasonable proportion, has been used by the 43rd Administration as a tool before (DHS terrorism levels). However to "blame" this DVD on the Republicans is unsupported by anything. Even if the DVD did come from Republican sources, it would be the most honest and fair thing I've ever seen used as "propaganda."

Have you watched it?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[downwardspiral 0]

It's free speech and I support their right to do it. I also support the newspaper's right to decide on their own whether they want to include it as an insert or not.

Kevin Smith's new movie is having problems finding ad space because of the word porno in the title.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,438545,00.html

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[quade 4]

Quote

It's free speech and I support their right to do it. I also support the newspaper's right to decide on their own whether they want to include it as an insert or not.

Kevin Smith's new movie is having problems finding ad space because of the word porno in the title.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,438545,00.html

To me, that's just silly. I would worry about any community that worried over the usage of the word in a title. It's a wide spectrum of "gee I'm offended at that" we live in, but seriously, that's just stupid.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[downwardspiral 0]

Oh I agree it's silly.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[JohnDeere 0]

So you would rater no one now the truth?????
What is wrong with the truth??

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!