Take the pledge -- Don't buy Disney

[Onlooker]

I will not buy any Disney products or visit any Disney destinations if they run their dishonest "Path to 9/11" docudrama on their ABC network.

[bryant69]

1. I vow not to change my shopping habits in an attempt to silence

an opinion I don't agree with.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[acmejack]

2. Solidarity!

I don't like it but I am not willing to do a damned thing about it? Okaaaayyyyy...

[bryant69]

3. I don't like people drinking - I think people should choose not to drink

does that give me the right to force others not to drink?

Bryant

[acmejack]

4. Great argument.

I hope I never have to try to get you to walk a picket line.

Occasionally one must take a stand or they stand for nothing.

[bryant69]

6. Taking a stand for censorship is not something i plan to do

Even if we are talking free lance censorship.

And please don't mistake my position for laziness or lack of will - after all if that were the answer wouldn't it be easier to just keep my mouth shut and let you guys do whatever you want? It's not like this opinion is going to win me any friends.

[Onlooker]

72. It's not censorship

Censorship is denying them the right to broadcast; that's a hell of a lot different than using our capitalist tools to fight them. By your standards, one could argue that Disney is censoring us by shutting out our point of view.

[Onlooker]

5. We're in a political struggle

In case you haven't noticed, we're in a political struggle. As long as we continue to support those who oppose us, they will not change their tune. This is a capatalist country, and the only means of fighting a corporation is with our wallet. Corporations represents shareholders, and if their actions hurt the shareholders, then the corporations will change their approach.

[bryant69]

7. By censoring and silencing an opinion you don't like.

I undestand. I don't agree.

[JuniperLea]

17. It's different than censoring an opinion

We're talking about blatant lies here. One should always stand for the truth and against lies, imho.

[bryant69]

20. One should stand for the truth

Another poster suggested e-mailing your local tv critic and providing him the facts for example. There are othe ways to combat lies. But boycotts designed to silence an opinion are not, in my mind, a good way to combat lies - they both open the door to truths being censored and they are ineffective- you will not actually stop the show from being aired but will instead encourage more people to watch it.

Bryant

[JuniperLea]

25. I don't shop at Wal Mart

??

[bryant69]

30. Not the same thing

Well I'd guess.

You didn't say why you didn't shop at Walmart but I would guess it is because of their unfair business and labor practices and the negative effects they have on communities. In other words you are punishing them for their actions - for what they do.

That's not the same as punishing a network for allowing an opinion different than yours to be broadcast.

Bryant

[JuniperLea]

35. That's not what I'm doing

I'm punishing a network for blatantly lying to the people of America, to the people of the world, and to our children. Much like my boycott of FauxNews. This idea that they can use this video as a history teaching tool is beyond morally wrong. This video is going to severely damage the country. If it were merely an opinion, that is one thing. No one is opining here. Someone is taking lies and labeling them as the truth. This is a concerted effort to lie to the world. There are no opinions being voiced here and nothing that is being passed off as opinions. They are not presenting them as opinions. Would you want your children to be taught that the Earth is flat and the sky is green? Would you want them to be taught that Hitler was a very good man and all those horrid Jews deserved to be killed? Those are lies. They are not opinions.

[bryant69]

36. Perhaps we are talking past each other

Are you boycotting the broadcast? Or are you attempting to punish them by boycotting ABC and Disney? Because of course nobody has a responsibility to watch something he doesn't like or agree with. I don't intend to watchi this program myself.

But the price for freedom of speech is allowing people to say things you hate or despise. The measure of your committment to freedom of speech isn't your willingness to tolerate and support beautiful speech you agree with and love. It's your willingness to tolerate ugly speech you disagree with and hate.

The way to combat ugly speech you disagree with and hate is not to ban it (as this boycott would attempt) but to counter it.

Bryant
check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[JuniperLea]

39. Perhaps this is something both Coke AND Pepsi drinkers can agree on!

Ask ABC to Come Clean On its 9-11 "Docudrama"
On September 10 and 11, ABC Television is planning to run an inaccurate film, The Path to 9/11, depicting the events leading up to the 9/11 attacks. The film was written by an avowed conservative activists and it largely places the blame for failing to prevent the attacks on the Clinton administration while whitewashing the failures of the Bush administration.

Reviews of the film have shown it to be full inaccuracies. According to researchers at Think Progress, the film’s distorted version of history is inconsistent with the 9/11 Commission Report, upon which it claims to be based.

The events leading up to September 11, 2001 are too important and too tragic for us let anyone play politics with the facts.

We the undersigned call on ABC to make it clear to viewers that this film is a docudrama, not a documentary account of the events and political decisions that preceded the attacks.

We the undersigned urge the network to run explicit disclaimers throughout the airing of The Path to 9/11 stating that it is nothing more than a docudrama.

ABC needs to come clean on this documentary today.


http://www.votelouise.com/page/petition/ComeCleanABC/kh...

[bryant69]

40. Yes i would totally agree with that.

Ideally ABC should put on something that shows a more accurate version of the events - or at least a different perspective, but if nothing else they should acknowledge that their little movie isn't is problemattic at best.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Richard Steele]

31. It's not "censoring opinion", it's DEMANDING TRUTHFULNESS. Different.

This is not a matter of OPINION, it's a matter
of what is a FACT and what is a LIE.

This miniseries is not being presented as a work of 'opinion',
it is taking some blatant UNTRUTHS and presenting them as FACT.

It is disseminating LIES for partisan political gain.

And "We the People" have EVERY RIGHT to demand that OUR
airwaves not be used for that purpose.

LIES and OPINIONS are two different things; I'm sorry
you can't tell the difference.

[bryant69]

33. That's funny - you don't sound sorry

At any rate I need hardly point out that this is a common technique of the censors. Your version of the Truth is the right one, and all other versions of the truth are lies - and so must be stomped out.

Bryant

[Richard Steele]

41. "Versions of the truth" exist, but must by definition adhere to the FACTS.

When a "version of the truth" CONTRADICTS factual reality,
it's not a "version of the truth" anymore. It is, at best,
a mistake. An ERROR.

And to give PROVEN mistakes and errors the same consideration
as valid opinion is contrary to all logic and reason.

There is a vast difference between an "honest opinion which differs from mine"
and a deliberate LIE. One is worthy of my respect and consideration,
the other is not.

And everyone but the backwashin' BushBase knows the difference.

[bryant69]

48. Ah. Did I just join the Backwashin' BushBase and not realize it?

What's wrong with backwashin' anyway - is that some euphamism? I try to wash my back every time i take a shower, although with limited success because it's hard to reach. But I at least rinse it off, and I have a brush to get most of it most of the time.

At any rate to make clear something that has perhaps been lost in eagerness to tar me, you aren't required to respect this documentary. Lord knows I don't. But attempting to silence it is censorship. And defending such censorship on the basis of "Well it's not true" doesn't fly. Because frankly everybodies opinions are based on the truth as they see it.

Bryant

[Richard Steele]

54. LOL, I sure hope not! Them folks is NUTZ! I'm SERIES!

When you say "Because frankly everybodies opinions are based on the truth as they see it."
that's certainly true. But I'm not discussing something being
offered as an OPINION, I'm discussing FACTS. LIES vs. TRUTHS.

If I say "2 + 2 = 5", that's not "the truth as I see it",
it's just WRONG. Mistaken. Incorrect. NOT subject to OPINION.

And if I say, "Bryant69's last post said he joined the Backwashin'BushBase",
that is not "the truth as I see it", it's a LIE. Again, it's not
subject to debate or opinion, it's just NOT TRUE.

In the same vein: when this Miniseries claims that specific, real people
said and did certain specific things which they DID NOT say or do,
that, again, is NOT "the truth as someone sees it". It is NOT subject
to opinion; it, as well, is a LIE.

It is not "the truth as someone sees it", simply because it is NOT THE TRUTH.

Respecting differences of opinion is one thing, and a good one.
But believing that LIES deserve the same consideration as TRUTHS
is a very different thing indeed, and no good can ever come of it.

Insisting that OUR airwaves not be utilized to spread LIES for
the partisan benefit of ANY particular group is not a bad thing.

[bryant69]

56. And if they claim, as they are claiming, that those seens are not

exact representations but composites of how the Clinton Administration acted, can that be kept off the public airwaves?

Or to put it another way, who gets to decide what Truth or what is so decietful it shouldn't be allowed on the air?

Bryant

[Richard Steele]

63. Then we call THAT the ridiculous, dishonest excuse that it is.

To once again use my example above, consider this:

SUPPOSE I spent 4 hours, spread over 2 days, posting here at DU,
"Bryant69 said he supports Bush"...

Perhaps more apropo, suppose that I create a visual work of fiction:
an altered photoshop of one of your posts,
creating the appearance that you had
actually SAID such a thing, and then I paste that
image into threads in every DU group.

Would that be OK, as long as I posted a single message
in a single thread saying "This is just a composite OPINION
of how I think some DUers act, not Bryant69 in particular"?

No, I think you would ALERT the moderators of this site,
and complain, "This guy is spreading LIES about me; he's
deliberately giving people the idea that I said things
I never said, and he shouldn't be allowed to do that.
His one tiny disclaimer doesn't mitigate the HARM he's
purposefully doing to my reputation here at DU"

I doubt you would be yelling "censorship" when the DU mods removed
those LYING images and prohibited me from further access to DU,
as we all know they would.

And you would be correct to OBJECT in very strong terms.
Any intelligent person would view such behavior
as dishonest, rerehensible, and as something NOT to be tolerated.
A single obscure disclaimer would NOT excuse it in any way.

You would NEVER accept such
a weak, dishonest excuse from someone who was
spreading harmful LIES about YOU. And anyone who
tells you that you should is simply WRONG.

[bryant69]

64. Ah once again - let me clarify

there are a number of ways to oppose this without resorting to boycott. If those involved believe the case is strong enough for libel, that's certainly a valid approach - or you might oppose it by presenting a different point of view or by presenting the facts to correct the misinformation.

Bryant

[Raksha]

59. Yes, maybe you DID just join the backwashing Bush base,

or maybe you've been a member for a while now. But I can't believe you've never heard the saying, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts." The makers of this mockumentary seem intent on creating their own facts. I don't think deliberate lying propaganda promoted with all the resources of a major TV network counts as protected speech. Congratulations--you just convinced me to join the Disney boycott, although I was leaning strongly in that direction anyway.

[bryant69]

62. I salute you

I am of course aware that you are far from the only one around here convinced that I am a freeper - but most do not acknowledge it openly - I salute your directness and courage.

so you are only interested in protecting speech that you agree with or that conforms to the facts as you see them. That's your right. But it is my right to disagree with you.

Her's another question - all this debate is predicated somewhat on the fact that you will fail in your attempt to keep this program off the air. We all know it. But let's imagine you could succeed. What's next? What other sources of disinformation and lies would you like off the air?

Bryant

[Jo March]

45. I agree with you, bryant69

I do, however, think that there should be a shitload of disclaimers during the movie. Maybe a disclaimer every 10 minutes or so?

We need to point out the lies in the best way that we can and do it loudly.

The movie is an affront to the truth but I am uneasy with censoring it. I think that we need to make sure that anyone and everyone who sees it knows that it is a steaming pile of crap.

[noonwitch]

13. I agree-no censorship!

When I was an evangelical (a long time ago), some of my friends wanted to start a campaign to ask to have a supposed movie about a gay Jesus banned (I've read about this since at Snopes). They wanted a campaign in which we wrote to our congresspeople and asked them to ban the movie. I told them it would be more appropriate to write to the studio making the movie and ask them not to make it. Anything else would be censorship. I quit the group not too much after that, because they were like that about everything they thought wasn't kissing up to their version of Jesus.

Anyways, I have neices who are 6 and 4. Try to avoid Disney with kids that age. I also have no plan on giving up my soap or "Lost", when the new season starts in a few weeks.

I watch O'Reilly and Hannity once in a while on FOX. Not because I agree with them, but because I consider it to be important to hear what the other side is saying.

[WinkyDink]

15. "Lies" are NOT "opinions", FYI.

[JuniperLea]

18. Exactly!

Taking a stand against blatant lies is NOT your garden variety censorship.

[bryant69]

22. They taste the same

ANd of course this is a popular argument with censors - we're not trying to silence opinion we just want to make sure people get their facts right.

Bryant

[SmokingJacket]

34. "You have a right to your own opinion, but not your own facts."

I don't object to ABC's opinion, but to their "facts."

However, if I boycotted everything connected to things I didn't agree with, I'd live in a cave.

I think keeping unnecessary consumption to a minimum is a good idea in general, and I DO make an effort to support businesses I like and want to see succeed.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. LOL

Well said.

[gully]

58. I vow to change mine. This ABC special isn't being promoted as OPINION

it's being promoted as "TRUTH."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

8. Hmm, nah.

I won't watch the movie. But I will buy the Disney products I do like.

[Onlooker]

10. This is why the right is dominant

The right wing activists are willing to take action. They pressured CBS into not running their movie about Reagan; they forced Dan Rather off the air; they've discouraged advertisers from advertising on Air America; etc. People who support companies that actively oppose us are not progressive; they're de facto allies of the right wing. Enjoy your Disney doll; perhaps it can substitute for a dead soldier or civilian.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Hmm. No it's not.

The right launched a boycott of Disney too. They were upset that Disney allowed homosexuals into their theme parks. It didn't work to well, and they were pretty organized too.

So just not watching the movie's going to have the same effect as a silly call for a boycott will. Disney's going to say "hey, nobody watched that movie, we should show that kind of thing anymore" and they won't.

Now, on the other hand, if it gets out that there's this huge (dis)interest in the movie and that people are boycotting, and whatnot. Then it's just going to drive up ratings for the movie, and the executives will be patting each other on the back. Bad publicity is still publicity.

[rinsd]

37. Ding ding ding!

"So just not watching the movie's going to have the same effect as a silly call for a boycott will. Disney's going to say "hey, nobody watched that movie, we should show that kind of thing anymore" and they won't.

Now, on the other hand, if it gets out that there's this huge (dis)interest in the movie and that people are boycotting, and whatnot. Then it's just going to drive up ratings for the movie, and the executives will be patting each other on the back. Bad publicity is still publicity."

I think ABC knew this was just filler and was precisely looking to cause a stink.

They're up against Manning vs Manning on Sun nite and a double header of Mon Nite football during the NFL's opening week.

[DireStrike]

60. "hey, nobody watched that movie, we shouldnt show that kind of thing"

lol... It's not like they're doing this because they think it will be good TV. They've denied requests for tapes to be reviewed from congressmen and ex presidents. No, this is a pure "Ram-it-through" propaganda piece.

[Scout1071]

28. Did you ever stop to think about the innocent families that work

for Disney that will be hurt by your boycott? Probably not. I guess they don't matter to you. But, hey...as long as you get your point across, screw them.

[Greyhound]

9. Disney free since 1996 (Unless you count occasionally watching ABC) n/t

[acmejack]

11. It kills me, they own ESPN!

Wahhh! Oh well got to walk the walk. Bryant, I understand your point, I really do. I didn't need to cheap shot you either, sorry. We all have our principles. Stand by your's-more power to you. If that is what you believe, I can respect that.

It is how the right has been fighting us, the corporations do understand the financial disincentive, and that stick only works if it is big enough & wielded with enough vigor to raise a substantial enough knot on their head that they realize we are actually serious about it.

[opti12206]

14. disney

I own lots of disney

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. Sure you do.

You've got the all the plush cartoon characters.

[Richard Steele]

32. "He's dead, Jim."

[Pacifist Patriot]

68. Given the search I just did.....

Your graphic is dead on. Oops, was that a pun on your tombstone or am I just glad to see you?

[chat_noir]

16. remember this?

http://archive.democrats.com/elandslide/petition.cfm?campaign=disney

[cobalt1999]

21. Never understood the anti-Disney feelings by the right and left.

First it was the Southern Baptists boycotting all of Disney because some of their companies made (gasp) non G or PG movies.

Then, the right wing wanted a boycott due to Disney Gay/Lesbian tolerance.

Then, the left wanted a boycott because of similarly dumb concepts...jeez!

If my kids want to go to Disney World, we're off to it.

[SidDithers]

42. If they're pissing everyone off...

then maybe they're not nearly as partisan as we might think.

Sid

[DireStrike]

61. You're forgetting that the right is insane

entitled, selective memory, etc...

[Cobalt-60]

23. I'll take the oath!

[borlis]

24. Just a general FYI...

The Disney Stores that are in shopping malls are no longer owned by Disney. They sold the stores to the Childrens Place over a year ago.

[Scout1071]

29. This is true. Disney no longer owns the Disney Stores. nt

[Idioteque]

26. The only way you can get me to boycott Disney...

...is to shut down the Carousel of Progress.

[Scout1071]

27. LET ME REMIND YOU THAT YOU WILL BE HURTING A LOT OF

good people who work for the Mouse. Some of them are DU'ers.

Want to make a point to ABC? Make your point, but no reason to hurt the otherwise innocent employees of Disney. Who do you think will take that hit? Won't be the execs.

[LeftyMom]

46. That's true of any boycott

But the real villains are not the boycotters but the corporate assholes who act so unethicly as to fuel a boycott of a generally popular company. If they want our business, all they have to do is be better corporate citizens and not use the public's arewaves to broadcast demonstrably false information for political purposes.

[Scout1071]

51. That's all well and good, but those "assholes" don't suffer,

the average worker does. When sales slump, who do you think gets laid off? As the old saying goes, "shit rolls down hill."

[LeftyMom]

53. Well, let's all go to WalMart then.

:shrug:

[Scout1071]

73. Give me a break.

That kind of TV production happens right here in the U-S-of-A. Sometimes in Canda.

Don't get me wrong. This film is a piece of shit and I encourage everyone to let ABC, locally and nationally, that they will not stand for this slander. BUT, I don't think that everyone who works at Disney should suffer the wrath of DU'ers. I think there are smarter, more effective ways. Target ABC. Be pleasant, but get everyone you know to call locally and nationally. That will go much further and will be more focused.

[JuniperLea]

38. Ask ABC to Come Clean!!!

Ask ABC to Come Clean On its 9-11 "Docudrama"
On September 10 and 11, ABC Television is planning to run an inaccurate film, The Path to 9/11, depicting the events leading up to the 9/11 attacks. The film was written by an avowed conservative activists and it largely places the blame for failing to prevent the attacks on the Clinton administration while whitewashing the failures of the Bush administration.

Reviews of the film have shown it to be full inaccuracies. According to researchers at Think Progress, the film’s distorted version of history is inconsistent with the 9/11 Commission Report, upon which it claims to be based.

The events leading up to September 11, 2001 are too important and too tragic for us let anyone play politics with the facts.

We the undersigned call on ABC to make it clear to viewers that this film is a docudrama, not a documentary account of the events and political decisions that preceded the attacks.

We the undersigned urge the network to run explicit disclaimers throughout the airing of The Path to 9/11 stating that it is nothing more than a docudrama.

ABC needs to come clean on this documentary today.


http://www.votelouise.com/page/petition/ComeCleanABC/kh...

[lies and propaganda]

43. espn and lost.....i cant do it.

ill tivo through commercials, write letters and talk shit, but I cant do a complete boycott.
But i am 26 with no kids, so i dont give a shit about actual Disney.

[carpetbagger]

69. It'll make you sick to your stomach soon enough.

Maybe tapering down works better for ESPN than smoking or DU or other addictions.

[Ron Green]

44. Disney has nothing of value to me, and they've caused much harm

in their privatization of what used to be public domain: stories, characters, images, songs, etc. I could live 50 lifetimes without needing to visit a Disney theme park, buy a Chinese-made Disney figure or watch any of their treacly movies.

[2tr4nqued]

47. Disney is sexist authoritarian crap anyway.

It is.

[YOY]

49. But they make so much quality entertainment!

How will I ever live without horribly banal and trite pablum for the poorly informed masses and their spawn?!?!?! :sarcasm:

[NotGivingUp]

50. we should all boycott the shit out of them!!!! put the kool-aid down and

boycott the living shit out of them!!! sounds to me like there's some real kool-aid drinkers here.

[mom cat]

52. My thoughts exactly. Boycotts are not censorship, but a free choice

where I spend my money. I will not support any organization that uses its clout to tell right wing lies PERIOD. Disney is just one of them. The only thing these people understand is money, and they can do without mine.

[jarnocan]

57. Nothing wrong not wanting to be LIED to.,and have the lies

allowed to stand with no questions or corrections. This is suppose to be a news documentary.
We have a right to boycott a company for promoting lies that harm people.

[MelliMel]

65. Sorry, but crazy RWers are already boycotting Disney.

And it worked really well. Yeah.

[watercolors]

66. Its been 15 yrs since I've bought a disney product

I decided to boycott them years ago. They have ruined the Orland area! Otlando use to be our favorite place to go to eat and relax, 1970's, it is just a nightmare now!!

[MrSlayer]

67. I pledge to boycott Disney World for a year.

I just got back from there last week.

[deacon]

70. And remember to carry this boycott through the holidays n/t

[tinfoilinfor2005]

71. M-I-C-K-E-Y-M-F-D-N-C

I think that is the new logo on the mickey mouse ears.