Jarvis On NewsNight
The following is the text of a comment I posted to Jeff Jarvis’ blog, Buzzmachine, on his recent appearance on CNN NewsNight to discuss the recent Michael Moore film. His viewpoint has received quite a bit of criticism – unfairly, I believe.
Though I am a fan of Moore, if only for his attempt to try to change something (I do believe he is genuinely interested in having a positive impact on society), I do have to agree with Jeff’s assessment of the film and Moore’s style of film-making. Moore’s films do appear to resort to the same selective use of facts on their issues as the targets of their scrutiny (the NRA, big business, Bush and the Republicans).
However, I would argue that without resorting to an extreme viewpoint (not only in this film, but also in Bowling for Columbine), Moore would never be heard. Period. I’m not saying that’s a good thing – just the way it appears to work with US media audiences.
Speaking as a Canadian who only recently moved to the US, I have found the news and the viewpoints presented in the US media to be very insular, internally-focused. I didn’t have access to the CBC for four months and basically didn’t hear about anything except for local news, Washington news, or Iraq news. I’m pretty sure there was other stuff going on in the world that was just as bad, just as important, just as worthy of my attention.
The viewpoints being presented in the media are extreme, and complex issues are often distilled to sound-bites that depict difficult issues in black-and-white terms with no room for thoughtful consideration or analysis. They are not conversations. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in the media present their viewpoint in a fashion that suggests they are interested in creating solutions or negotiating – no one has the guts to say “You know what, I’ve reconsidered what you’re saying, and I think you might have a point. Maybe I’m wrong on X.”
I am reminded of Moore’s segment in Bowling for Columbine, where he interviewed one of the producers of Cops. The producer said he couldn’t produce a similar show focusing on white-collar crime, because no one would watch it – it wouldn’t be interesting enough for the audience. Perhaps Moore came to a similar conclusion early in his film-making career – he freely admitted to putting his own spin on the facts on The Daily Show earlier this week. There is no doubt he is intelligent and creative, but perhaps providing a fair and balanced examination of the issues would win him no audience at all, no opportunity to shock us into thinking, to perform a cerebral resuscitation. Without resorting to extreme views, we would be left with only one point of view to consider.
That leaves the responsibility for thoughtful consideration up to us, the public. We have two extreme viewpoints – I believe the truth lies somewhere in between. If we’re going to talk, let’s talk – not just shout at each other.
Moore always uses shock techniques to get his point across. The most poignant moment is during Roger and Me where a recently laid off GM worker slaughters a rabbit on camera to sell its fur for money. Thanks, Mike. Really needed that. Am I upset because the worker is out of a job or because she brutally slaughtered that cute adorable fluffy bunny?
I don’t blame Michael Moore for using these techniques, however. I believe most people, after they reasonably process all his manipulation, will settle on what is real and what is not. Just like that Jesus movie.