DISNEY HAS NOT CAVED. (The thread with that title is a joke thread)

[Nikki Stone 1]

Please do not be fooled and do not recommend that thread. Disney is still going to show The Path to 911 and we STILL must fight it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Oh the horror!

I clicked on a thread and it wasn't what I thought it was! Oh, how long I toiled and suffered hitting the back button! Oh, the pain! The pain!

[EFerrari]

4. Lol!

:rofl:

[RB TexLa]

7. And I bet the poster of the thread hasn't even offered to help

with the costs of the years of therapy you will certainly have to endure due to the emotional roller coaster they put you through. :rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. Oh, the bills! The bills!

[Ron Green]

2. A joke thread? Maybe, but very effective. I recommended it.

[question everything]

9. I hit the alert

I rarely use it but that thread is in bad joke. A chep shot to get it being kicked, I suppose. To each his own.

[Nikki Stone 1]

13. Cheap shot is right.

Just somebody who wanted a little attention by crying "fire" in crowded room.

[Puglover]

18. Hey Nikki

a suggestion. Look up the word "irony". It might save you further embarrassment.

[Nikki Stone 1]

23. I'm not embarrassed in the least. Are you?

:)

[Puglover]

24. I would be had I posted this.

:) But peace sister. We're all under it these days.

[Nikki Stone 1]

32. It takes intelligence to appreciate irony, but even more intelligence

to appreciate when it is appropriate.

It was inappropriate and in bad taste in this context.

And I'm sorry that you would be embarrassed by showing an understanding of such a context.

Peace to you too. I hope you contacted ABC and Disney as many of us have done. :)

[rg302200]

53. I hadn't contacted ABC and Disney...

Until I clicked the thread you are so vehemently against and realized Disney's hypocrisy. The poster did a good job of capturing everyone's attention in order to point out Disney's hypocrisy. So my advice to you is to just chill out and focus on ABC and Disney and NOT each other!

[Nikki Stone 1]

55. Of all the Disney threads on DU over the past couple of days, it was a

"pull my finger" kind of thread that got you moving, huh. I find that very interesting.

Many, many DUers have been actively working to fight Disney on this and have been doing so for several days. Nice that you finally joined us.

[Individualist]

26. It was a "tee hee, I made you look" post

One has to wonder what's next - pull my finger?

[question everything]

33. A perfect description (nt)

[Nikki Stone 1]

35. Exactly.

Good point.

[ps1074]

20. holy cow

Did you really hit the alert?

I really couldn't care less if a thread of mine is been recommended or kicked. I was just posting the hypocrisy. May be, just may be if it was real news, I would have posted it in the LBN?

[Gold Metal Flake]

31. Nevermind

OR wishes to recall this post.

[Richardo]

47. Very effectively too, ps1074

Pay no attention to the humor-impaired. :patriot:

[question everything]

48. Do a quick search of GD to find out how man threads have BREAKING

in the heading. Often someone just repeats what's already on LBN, wanting to add his own interpretation.

[Nikki Stone 1]

10. Not effective--misleading. And with potential to start rumors

It's irresponsible.

[druidity33]

54. well maybe, but...

only for people who just read the titles on the Greatest page and not the body of the post...

i hadn't contacted ABC or Disney until i saw the post you're calling irresponsible. To be honest, i was slightly indifferent, thinking i just wouldn't watch it and that would be that. But after fuming/remembering their stance on F911 (after being reminded by said irresponsible post), outrage compelled me to compose a few emails.

rather effective i should say...

[Jersey Devil]

3. But here's one of the edits that ABC proposes

[Nikki Stone 1]

5. "My Pet Mouse"?

:)

[Generic Other]

43. He wore that hat in New Orleans too

[Imagevision]

6. a joke...

[Mad_Dem_X]

8. Noooo, really?

Anyone who takes the time to read the OP will see that it is not real. Give us some credit here.

[Nikki Stone 1]

12. It made greatest page and may mislead some DUers

Especially those that don't have the time to read every OP.

Highly irresponsible.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

14. It wasn't a joke thread

It was an arrow into the heart of the entire situation. I recommended it, and proclaim it proudly.

[helderheid]

25. Exactly. If they didn't air F9/11 because it was too close to an election,

then how can they possibly air this piece (of shit)?

[dogday]

51. It blew me away

I remember that.... Now we should make them remember it....

[question everything]

15. Kick (nt)

[Richard Steele]

16. Because I would have recommended it without reading it?

Not only do you seem to have a very low opinion
of DUers' cognitive abilities, you definitely
missed the POINT of that thread.

I'm going to go recommend it now.

[Nikki Stone 1]

19. No, because a DUer scanning the titles on a lunchbreak might

not have time to check out the whole thread and realize that some attention-seeker had decided to have a little joke.

And dick, recommend what you like. I promise I won't say a single word about your cognitive abilities. :)

[question everything]

21. This forum is hoping

Many DUers are on the phones, sending emails, distributing leaflets - working hard to expose the charade of ABC - and that post is really like shouting "fire" in a crowded movie theatre.

But, I suppose, for someone whose sole activity is sitting at his desk clicking away, this is nothing more than a shrug and a smirk.

I will continue to kick this thread - as long as I am at my computer - so that it will go hand in hand with the other.

[Nikki Stone 1]

29. Thank you for getting it. I appreciate it.

It takes intelligence to appreciate irony, but even more intelligence to appreciate when it is appropriate.

[AndrewJacksonFaction]

46. Do you Recommend posts without reading them first?

Do you Recommend posts without reading them first?

[Nikki Stone 1]

59. Thanks for the non sequitur. I guess it's better than no sequitur at all.

:)

[Richard Steele]

39. Well then, in the interest of fairness, I'll give this one a kick as well.

I still think the other one makes a FINE point.

[Roxy66]

28. Stop trashing her....it was in bad taste.

[Nikki Stone 1]

30. Thank you.

It takes intelligence to appreciate irony, but even more intelligence to appreciate when it is appropriate.

[Puglover]

17. Oh. My. Gawd.

Just when I thought I had seen it all. :rofl:

[madinmaryland]

22. If you read the thread, the OP is trying to point out the hypocrisy

of CBS, in that they are happy to show this piece of RW trash, and yet would not release Michael Moore's Farenheit 911. I think he/she made their point very well.

[Nikki Stone 1]

27. I get it, dear. I got it the first time. I think the title is ill-advised

in the current climate. Especially when the title makes greatest page and some people might be misled especially if they don't have the time to read the rest of it.

[ScreamingMeemie]

34. We disagree. I think it is amazing in its hypocrisy...I K and R'd it.

I think everyone needs to take a breath. You realize it isn't what it seems when you click on it, and it's only a waste of mere seconds of your time. :hi:

[Nikki Stone 1]

37. I respectfully disagree. Wrong context.

But no hard feelings.

[ScreamingMeemie]

38. Yes, because I usually agree with you.

:hi:

But on this one the poster did a good job of pointing out the hypocrisy of the whole situation.

[TahitiNut]

44. Once upon a time ...

... we had a DU rule against intentionally false or misleading Subject in a thread title. (You and i should still remember those days vividly.) Since then, the problem has taken some time to resurface, but resurface it has. GD increasingly resembles not a democracy but anarchy and the overt disrespect for orderly discussion where participation is honored is sadly on the increase again. The "novelty" of false thread titles will erode faster than a fart in a windstorm, I predict.

[ScreamingMeemie]

52. Sure, but at times we were able to bend rules for the purposes of

things such as hypocrisy on the part of the RW.

We used to have great rules. I even miss the day of the enforced "time out"...

Hugs,
Laura

[Nikki Stone 1]

58. "we had a DU rule against intentionally false or misleading Subject in a

thread title"


I can understand why you might have that rule.

I think the problem is chiefly one of context. Sometimes, a thread is obviously a joke ("Iranian President Does Polka with Richard Simmons") and can be just a lighthearted kind of thing. But in the context of a real activist fight, any false thread title can be misleading.

I think the context is crucial and I think that thread titles are influential. There were other ways to show Touchstone's hypocrisy with Farenheight 911 without misleading or insulting some DUers who had been actively working to contact Disney and Scholastic. There are some amazing people on this board who do amazing things. The author of the thread was not among them. He or she was merely getting a little attention for him/herself with an inflammatory title at the expense of those who were really fighting the fight.

[ps1074]

61. you cannot possibly be serious

Me seeking attention? If I wanted to I would kick my thread every hour or so. I didn't do it.

I already said I couldn't care less if a thread of mine is being K&R. You on the other hand are doing a great job in keeping kicking your own thread and insulting me.

I may not be as amazing as some people here. Hell, I may even be worthless - who knows... But only people that know me can say that and you're not one of them. I am not the attention whore you're trying to make me look like. You should be ashamed of yourself...

[Generator]

36. Has anyone seen any spots for this docupropaganda?

I've been watching the View this week, watched something else the other night-oh yeah the "Outsiders"-bwahh..anyway-I haven't noticed it being hyped but have seen them hyping Boston Legal, Gray's Anatomy ect. I'm hoping no one wants to watch the damn thing anyway.

[raysr]

40. The poll on MSNBC reflects the well

known fact that 30% will follow * off a cliff, either way this movie won't change that. I don't beleive the 60% that don't believe Bush will be swayed by this movie. But this teaching aide shit is where the evil really lies, the rewrite of history!

[AtomicKitten]

41. I thought it was amusing.

In a sad way. It pointed out the dichotomy in fairness between the Rs and Ds.

I'm giving that "joke" thread two thumbs up.

Sorry to disappoint those not amused.

[EstimatedProphet]

42. So?

The other post made a very good point about Disney's hypocracy. It was made clearly and honestly. It was not a joke post. The point is valid, and it is ridiculous to try and stop people from looking at the other thread just because you are mad that it fooled you.

[Liberal Dose]

45. Disney Refuses to Air Movie "Politicizing" 9/11 so close to an election.

Oops, my mistake, sorry... It was 2 years ago and the movie was called Fahrenheit 9/11.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2072229

Damn that PS1074. Did I make it better? :rofl:

[Nikki Stone 1]

57. Actually, that title allows for more ambiguity and actually is better

The other is unambiguous and misleading.

[BigBearJohn]

49. It is EXTREMELY important that the press finds out about this hypocracy.

If this poster got everyone to read the post through creativity,
all the more credit to them.

[Nikki Stone 1]

56. Did you write to Disney about their hypocrisy?

That would have been very valuable.

[Leopolds Ghost]

50. If someone didn't have time to read the original thread, how likely is it

That scanning the thread title on DU prevented them from taking action on the issue?

Wouldn't anyone who seriously intended to write or call about this docuganda movie be interested enough to click on the original thread to find out "what happened" and be rewarded by an excellent talking point which cuts thru the signal-to-noise ratio? Really, there is no other legitimate argument for wanting to censor the film.

If you use the hypocrisy argument and they air the film anyway, you have them dead to rights next time they change their minds and refuse to air a liberal "docuganda" movie like F-911. You have a tailor-made argument to trot out each and every time instead of nitpicking over factual details of films whose job is to persuade the viewer.

Of course F911 was factual but that's besides the point. ABC knows very well this is about influencing people's beliefs. Facts are secondary to the discussion -- Americans prefer entertainment when it comes to their propaganda. Unentertaining, depressing facts go in one ear and out the other.

Even my (liberal) friends and family members tune out stuff they find "too depressing and probably exagerated." I imagine middle-class conservatives do the same thing.

[Nikki Stone 1]

60. Having not done a statistical study, I can't give exact figures, but

studies have been done of newspaper readers, and many of them just read the headlines without actually reading the article. FAIR talks about this phenomenon, and one of their pieces of advice to the critical readers of newspapers is to compare the headline with the article. Sometimes, the headline can be misleading or not reflect the real facts in an article.

Based on that kind of research, I assume that a certain number of DUers will check in with Greatest Page, see the title "Disney has Caved" and may in fact believe that the battle is over, especially if they don't have the time to actually read the post.

[question everything]

62. Another kick (nt)