Quote: Matter-eater Man said: I believe if a network advertises & promotes something like Path to 9/11 as a docudrama & based on the 9/11 report, they should be held to that. It's a case of false advertising.
Okay, then how do you feel about, say, CBS advertising something as a National Guard memo about George Bush that turned out to be a forgery? Should the President be able to sue CBS for false advertising? Should viewers?
It's one thing being fooled & another knowingly promoting something that has fictionalized scenes directly contradicting what they were touting it being based on.
Quote: And how "fictionalized" does the film have to be to make it "false advertising"?
For example, tonight I heard an interview with the producer of the Oliver Stone "9/11" movie. He told a story about how they cast one of the secondary characters as a white man and didn't find out until later that he was an African American. Should Stone's movie be subject to a lawsuit for false advertising?
The Stone thing sounds minor. On the other hand Path had major scenes fictionalized while others contradict the findings of the 9/11 commision. I'm not or haven't advocated that ABC should be sued BTW.
Quote: And, of course, there's the whole Michael Moore question. Who should get to sue him for false advertising?
Again I'm not advocating to sue ABC. There is a difference between asking & pressuring a network like ABC to do the right thing as opposed to threatning legal action. They'll get a letter from me expressing my dissapointment over their false promotion but no threats of legal action.
