Moore v. Blitzer
See it here.
The real outrage was not so much Blitzer, who was his usual self, tongue-tied and clueless in the face of Moore’s justifiably relentless criticism, but the segment on Sicko by CNN’s resident medical expert Sanjay Gupta. In what was essentially a point-by-point evaluation of the accuracy of some of Moore’s statistical claims in Sicko — with no such evaluation of Moore’s critics, those who oppose reform and defend the status quo or call for greater Big Pharma- and HMO-friendly initiatives, let alone with any self-evaluation — Gupta failed to address the most serious flaws of the American system, namely, the enormous costs even to those with insurance and the utter lack of insurance for millions. Does it really matter whether emergency room waiting times are this much longer or that much shorter in the U.S. than elsewhere? Does it really matter how much, in exact figures, the U.S. spends on health care compared to other countries, those with “socialized” health care (i.e., universal coverage)? It does, in a way, but the relative merits of different systems cannot be judged solely on the basis of selected statistics. The real problem with the American system is that it leaves out millions and destroys the lives of many of those who are fortunate enough to find coverage.
But CNN would rather attack Moore than present the truth — and would rather present attacking Moore as analysis than report on what is really going on in American health care. (And Moore was fully right to point to all the Big Pharma ads on CNN, a clear conflict of interest.) Not that one expects much else even from CNN — this wasn’t Fox, after all, which is far worse — but this was simply appalling.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
14 Responses to “Moore v. Blitzer”
So you are not allowed to criticize or evaluate Moore and his very specific movie unless you cull through a bunch of counter arguments to criticize them at the same time? What BS. Since when has criticism arising from a film, ANY film, been done that way? (Funny I don’t remember folks claiming this “right” when The Passion was drawing fire.)
Well it is good to know you have made up your mind already MS. I guess the rest of us can only expect to be propagandized to (in a Pro-Moore manner of course as dissent is not to be ALLOWED.)
Baloney. It is nothing but a ad hominem attack by Moore. The NYT allows Boeing (and numerous other arms manufacturers) to buy full page ads, does that mean the NYT can no longer be trusted on issues of military expenditures? Garbage.
I notice that you do not outline a single substantive fact that CNN got wrong in its Moore criticism.
I’m sorry CNN does not buy the Gospel according to Michael Moore, he will just have to get over it (or himself.)
I’m glad I missed this.
In a way, Moore does a disservice to the serious issue of health care. Because he uses comedy and outrageoursness, he makes himself too easy a target. Attacking him makes it easy to attack the serious issues.
CNN and MSNBC are so blatantly in bed with big business interests, I would have expected this reaction, no matter how the subject was raised.
Counting the number of Big Pharma ads during any hour of air time, makes the reaction predictable.
Fair and unbiased news coverage is dead.
I from afar, continue to stare in quiet awe at a nation that considers free public education sacrosanct but free public healtcare controversial.
Socialized medicine has it’s problems, to be sure, but I think it bears considering that those of us who have it would scream bloody murder at the idea of adopting the American model. After all, it’s not like the well off aren’t allowed to have private medicine if they want. But the very idea that someone could die because they can’t PAY… That the literal value of your life depends on your paycheck, befuddles me in the context of a civilized nation. The idea that you could even be a productive member of society and be sent to the poorhouse because your child has a serious illness, that you would be denied care BECAUSE you are already ill…it just boggles the mind.
Relax all, at least CNN does an occasional “real” news story. While it isn’t the “TASS” of the liberal Turner days, it panders less than MSNBC(sex predator) and Fox News(Billo’s roving Dick van Dyke lesbo gangs).
Living across from Canada, I know many Canadians love their system, regardless of what the MSM here says. Even Mexico has “Commie health care”, so why are they flocking here?
The real point is Moore was right.
Iconic Midwest wrote:
> I notice that you do not outline a single substantive
> fact that CNN got wrong in its Moore criticism.
Probably because the facts are all over the internet. CNN couldn’t even quote the movie correctly; they said Sicko claimed that Cuba’s healthcare costs were $25/person, even though Sicko said $251. This probably meant that CNN was reading a written script and missed a digit. Oops. CNN off by a factor of TEN.But hey, they MEANT to tell the truth. Is there really such a big difference between $25 and $251?
So there’s your “single substantive fact.” There are lots of others too, but they’ve been noted by carpeicthus in his link.
Doma: ‘In a way, Moore does a disservice to the serious issue of health care. Because he uses comedy and outrageoursness, he makes himself too easy a target. Attacking him makes it easy to attack the serious issues.’
Right. It’s why F 9/11 failed as agitprop, because its maker turned off as many people as its subject- W.
It was kind of amusing to watch Moore take CNN to task for its piss poor job on covering Iraq.
However, as valid as some of his criticism of CNN was, this interview wasn’t supposed to be about CNN but about Moore and his tendency to use deceptive tactics to make his point. He says that everything in his film is 100% correct, but he couldn’t even get through the interview with Wolf Blitzer without making one of the deceptive statements possible with regards to universal health care–that it is free.
This is a ridiculous claim. No government program is for free–not war, not welfare, not social security, not public education. Every single one of these government programs is paid for with taxpayer dollars, and this will be as true for universal health care as any other government program.
We still have an ever-vibrant “Pravda” in NPR.
The issue was Moore and his movie, not his critics — do not waste readers’ time trying to deceive them or evade the real issue. We know your mind was already made up long before this or any other interview Moore might do, but don’t let that control what you post on here as well to the point of illogic to bizarre lengths, or to transparent dishonesty.
The movie’s critics and supporters have published many things already. Moore uses gimmickry; he is not fully serious, and hopefully the lefty teachers in schools won’t be so desperate (and destructive toward underage pupils) that they show this movie in classes, or worse, order that it be studied for assignments.
Federal (government) health care: Obviously it is no panacea, despite the beliefs and statements of dupes. We will exchange one set of problems for another if we switch to public medicine in the USA. I can accept it and I believe this is in our future, but I’m not so foolish as to believe it will be miraculous. Even with conversion to public medicine, there will be huge needs for revenue now and more later, and cost controls will be inevitable.
JOBS!!!
For some, “birthright [US] citizenship” if they’re about to have a child, or for others, to get on welfare, but how many actually do that intentionally, as their travel objective, remains a mystery. Most come here for jobs; the money gets sent back to Mexico.
She meant “free” as used commonly to mean “free of charge.” It would be like free transit in town as well as free public education — free of charge. There still are costs, obviously, which require taxes to pay them.
I always feel that an issue is better viewed through a balanced resolution. The current system is one horrific extreme; Moore’s socialized medicine is another horrific extreme.
The public is a sucker for statistics. We know our health care system is broken. Yet, Moore seems to have a number for everything. Of course you can. You can justify causation for just about anything, if you use the 9 gazillion statistics available. But that doesn’t necessarily make him right. The French medical system is a complete mockery to the world, not a Utopia. The Canadian system is broken too–if you haven’t already, watch “Dead Meat”, a short film about the problems with Canadian health care (note: that film is also equally one-sided).
The problem with socialized medicine is, it waters down the quality of our health care. Our health care is expensive because its quality is second-to-none. Our technology and doctor expertise far surpasses any country. In fact, it’s almost the only industry where America holds an advantage in this globalized world. Furthermore, with socialized medicine, a person with a serious heart problem can wait for months before having an immediate procedure that needs to be taken care of right away. And a lot of that is so that another person with a slight tummyache can get a free consultation.
So yes, we should look TOWARD socialized medicine as a cure, but don’t believe Moore: we should NOT completely adopt the system. It has a ton of flaws, if you care to check up on it. By the way, Kurt Loder wrote an unbelievable rebuttal to “Sicko.” I’d suggest you all check it out as required reading.
Who gives you better service the post office or ups? Who are you more likely to use to send an important package? Now imagine that there was no ups, fed ex groung, ect. How good do you think the post office would be then? When I go to the doc I don’t want it to be like when I go to the post office.