Michael Moore gets his first doubtful approval from me with the quote in this article, saying “I don’t like this film being reduced to Bush vs. Kerry.” However, that's not what this post is about.
"Today people get their news and, just as important, their attitudes from more rambunctious sources: from the polarized polemicists on talk radio and cable news channels, from comedians and webmasters. That’s poli-tainment, and as practiced by Rush Limbaugh and a host of right-wing radio hosts, and by Matt Drudge on the internet, it hounded Bill Clinton’s presidency while spicing and coarsening the standards of political discourse, Corliss writes."
Ouch. Play nice, kids! Notice, of course, that it's only the "right-wing radio hosts" that are slandered as "poli-tainment" and Matt Drudge, who, if you notice, posts links to articles (does he write anything on his website himself? Hmm, pretty hard to pull of poli-tainment if you're not doing any writing EDIT]: I may be wrong there. I think Drudge does write short articles, but a lot of his stuff is just links to other articles). The sources cited here do have their opinions, and they speak up about them. Oh, my! They don't claim to be indifferent, but they aren't in the entertainment industry. To these right-wingers, the facts are the most important part of what they do. I'm sure it's the same with many left-wingers out there too.
Just a question, sirs. What is Michael Moore's movie? An unbiased documentary? I find that highly doubtful. I'm sure it crosses that "poli-tainment" line.
http://www.time.com/time/press_releases/article/0,8599,660927,00.html via drudgereport.com