But ABC isn't even claiming that they're exposing truths. They've *admitted* that the scenes in question are fiction. Their excuse is that it's not a documentary.
But they're calling it a "docudrama," airing it without commercials, and originally had Scholastic distributing materials for schools to use. (Scholastic has withdrawn.)
Their actions are telling people "This is the truth. This is the real thing."
If an outcry hadn't been raised, millions of people would have watched that and assumed it represented what happened.
Sure, the people represented could sue. They might even win. It wouldn't erase the impression the movie left on people. Why do you think lawyers try to select juries who aren't familiar with media coverage of a major case. Or in some cases, they try to select juries who *are* familiar with the media coverage, if the coverage is in their favor.
What ABC is doing is not illegal. And it shouldn't be, because that *would* be censorship. But it's irresponsible and morally wrong.
no subject
But they're calling it a "docudrama," airing it without commercials, and originally had Scholastic distributing materials for schools to use. (Scholastic has withdrawn.)
Their actions are telling people "This is the truth. This is the real thing."
If an outcry hadn't been raised, millions of people would have watched that and assumed it represented what happened.
Sure, the people represented could sue. They might even win. It wouldn't erase the impression the movie left on people. Why do you think lawyers try to select juries who aren't familiar with media coverage of a major case. Or in some cases, they try to select juries who *are* familiar with the media coverage, if the coverage is in their favor.
What ABC is doing is not illegal. And it shouldn't be, because that *would* be censorship. But it's irresponsible and morally wrong.