Michael Moore has won the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, and may win an Oscar for the kind of work that got Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Jack [Kelley] fired. . . .
Some journalists and critics have acted as if his wrenching of facts is no more serious than a movie continuity problem, like showing a 1963 Chevy in 1956 Santa Monica. . . .
In the New York Times, Paul Krugman wrote that, “Viewers may come away from Moore’s movie believing some things that probably aren’t true,” and that he “uses association and innuendo to create false impressions.” Try to imagine those phrases on a marquee. But that is his rave review! He lauds “Fahrenheit 9/11” for its “appeal to working-class Americans.” Do we really want to believe that only innuendo, untruths, and conspiracy theories can reach working-class Americans? . . .
Read the whole thing. Thanks to Dan Gifford for the pointer.
UPDATE: Krugman’s piece is available for free here.
Comments are closed.