08 September 2006

ZENmud with Evidentiary proof... Media Bias 101...

Soon ABC will air its totally disreputable documentary, with now an [ob]scene that puts action and words into the Clinton Administration that verifiably didn't occur as will have ABC imagined and presented them... and has offered a biased guide for classrooms!

So let us RIP through an ABC online article and show how their bias lays today (with a JD degree and a bit of Evidence in the background, I offer only insight, not expertise...)...

The article is “Documentary Slams U.S. Companies Working in Iraq” and it discusses the author, his film, not his facts, but then his critics. I hope you'll stay with me on this for about 5 minutes of your life... I'm pasting the article, but will interject [comments] inside square brackets

Sept. 4, 2006

He's tackled Wal-Mart and Fox News with his scathing documentaries. Now, filmmaker Robert Greenwald is releasing a documentary which argues that private companies helping to fight the war in Iraq don't have the nation's best interests in mind.
['scathing' as an adjective might force a reader to already take Pro or Con sides... ok / the unstated ABC position is that 'As a major corporate sponsor of the Bush administration (FCC programing-related?) we certainly can't investigate overcharges to the Defense Department']

"Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers" debuts in limited release this week, and presents an assault on companies that provide the kinds of services in Iraq that the military once handled itself, such as supplying food, water and mail delivery for the reconstruction.
[other than 'an assault'... this is subtle, is not explored, and forms the basis of film's content]

In the film, former KBR/Halliburton water purification specialist Ben Carter is interviewed and says when a motor went out on a truck, they would "buy a new truck … and bill the government."
[Any perusal of a few Congressional Oversight documents would perhaps verify such practices: ABC/Disney chooses to not do so / I guarantee that ABC had stories about the $640 dollar hammers back in the good old Reagan days]

Greenwald also interviewed relatives of four Blackwater Security guards who were mutilated in Fallujah in March, 2004. One mother claimed her son died because the company cut corners, failing to supply armored vehicles or maps.
[Article doesn't broach whether she has email evidence from her son, or his multiple phonecalls to family members, as evidence]

"My son is not walking the earth because people he trusted and worked for did not care about him," said Donna Zovko, whose son Jerry Zovko was among the four Blackwater employees killed by insurgents in 2004.
[Thus she admittedly is horrified/distraught, but still ABC could 'go deeper']

Greenwald requested interviews with the contractors he is criticizing, but they turned him down.

Blackwater told ABC News it couldn't comment on the Fallujah incident because it's the subject of a lawsuit, and Halliburton offered a statement saying the film includes "yet another rehash of inaccurate, recycled information."
[“Yet another rehash... recycled information” doesn't negate the truth contained therein]

Critics of these kinds of documentaries remind viewers not to expect balance from left-leaning documentaries, such as Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" and former Vice President Al Gore's global warming film, "An Inconvenient Truth."
[(obvious 'Guuilt by Association'?) Now here we go: in the eighth 'sentence-paragraph! Where is “Supporters of these kinds of documentaries remind viewers not to expect fair reporting on this film?” OR “This film documents evidence and sends a powerful message to this Administration” OR “We independently investigated several of this film's charges and we agree that...”]

"Finally, the left has figured out their answer to talk radio -- and it's documentaries," said Prof. Richard Lichter of George Mason University.
[Nearly overtly admitting that the MSM is 'rightly' biased, and has been for years]

"Iraq for Sale" was produced more like a political campaign than a traditional movie, largely funded by 3,000 small donations made on the Internet.
[Are you getting the idea of 'second level analysis'? Progressive interests have no allies in the MSM and must unite as small-investors to get a necessary project funded!]

It's being released on a small scale this week and will then be screened in thousands of homes, union halls and churches in time for the November elections.
[Hint: most films are 'pre-released' somewhere / “homes, union halls and churches” is phrased to diminish the reader's perception of its force]

Copyright © 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures

[Disney/ABC donated 640 thousand to Bush' 2000 campaign]

As an example of bias, tangentially evidential to its release of its own biased and proven-false film “Path to 9/11”, there is hardly none finer... You may certainly object to my analysis, but let's see the film itself, first!

Stay tuned for a sequel...

Subliminally yours...

No comments: