Slanted headlines....

It's amazing just how the twist of a word can really swing a debate one way or the other..

I came across this headline: Who star hits out at Michael Moore via Google News.. When you go to the nme.com website, the headline is actually: PETE WON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN!

Now My initial thoughts after reading the first headline was that Pete Townsend of the band "The Who," was attacking Moore for the movie like so many other people have done.. When in fact the article is about how Townsend was approached by Moore to use one of his songs in the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11..

Townsend refused to allow the song, Moore charged him with being a supporter of the war..

Breaking it down a little bit here:
- Townsend made a song
- He refused to allow Moore to use it in the documentary
- Moore labels Townsend as a war supporter
- Townsend later admits that he was initially in favor of the war, but in lieu of recent developments, he is not sure

Does Moore have the right to criticize Townsend?? Of course.. But that doesn't make Michael Moore *right* in this situation.. Townsend can share his song with whoever he cares to with any or no explanation.. Even if he decides at the last minute that he wants to pull the song (which is what happened..) Remember, the same thing happened to Disney when they were co-owned with Miramax and did not want Fahrenheit 9/11 released.. If it wasn't for Harvey Weinstein and the Miramax group saying "Okay Mickey Mouse, we're outta here," then the documentary would've had a very difficult time getting anywhere..

But back to Townsend, the song and Michael Moore.. Townsend is not obligated to Mr. Moore anymore than I am to helping out if he approached me.. It is ultimately about choice and Pete chose his way at the last minute, Michael was upset by it.. I can understand both parties, but the headline I read on google news is a prime example of why any thing that is printed, reported on, etc. should be raised as suspect..

We live in an era where newspapers, radio and television edit more content than we're aware of.. When it satisfies the "slant" that the company distributing the news -- then we're never given the whole story.. It won't be until we can see the complete, un-edited portion of an interview, of a news story that we can fully make up our own opinion..

Just because a news story appears in the paper, on the radio or TV -- doesn't mean it's the "right" version of what happened.. Unfortunately the companies want to slant their view so that YOU, the READER, the VIEWER, the LISTENER are completely in tune with whatever propaganda they want you to know..

Don't let yourself get suckered into the words on the page..

Allow yourself the ability to faithfully question what information you're receiving..

And lastly: always remember that unless you witnessed an event first hand - that information which you're getting from the press is a different colored pair of sunglasses..