Moore No More (Week 5)

So last week we finished up on our study of Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. While wrapping up the blog, the question I wanted to know was whether these techniques would be used in Michael Moore Hates America. Unfortunately, I thought we would be starting that documentary this week, but that wasn't the case. I was too afraid that I would spoil the movie if I went digging around looking for answers to the question, but I did find this interesting video.

Anyways, this week we started looking at the other side of propaganda, through the film A Perfect Candidate. The movie tackles a more conservative view point than what we've been looking at recently, but more interesting is the way the film is presented compared to the works of Michael Moore. It focuses on the way Oliver North uses persuasive techniques on his audiences rather than having a narrator persuade the viewer. The film explicitly uses raw footage, where as Moore would provide commentary, background music, and soundbites to get his point across. The point of A Perfect Candidate is more to document the campaigning process than to persuade the viewer in any direction.

That being said, there is still a variety of fallacies and propaganda to be found throughout the film. Most notable is North's appeal to the common man. He's provided a few examples so far, but most notable is when he hosts a picnic in all casual attire and even shows off his skills with a gun. He's trying to appeal to folks by showing them that he's just like them, which is not the case. Politicians try desperately to relate back to the common man, when in reality, they have very little in common.

Another good example is North's testimony in church. The way he words his testimony makes it sound like he's struggled with difficult obstacles and forced to unjustly serve two years in prison for a what he believed wasn't a crime. His wording created an emotion of pity among his audience, even though he's not this innocent, average American. He lied to the US government and embezzled money, yet he believed that because his intentions were innocent, his actions were justified. Religion also plays a large role in this public facade he puts on. As seen in the political debate as well as the aforementioned testimony, North makes it appear that he holds religion at the forefront of his political campaign. Now I'm not saying that's entirely an act as well, but he certainly makes his religious standpoints clear.

North is also quick to jump on other candidates for hiding parts of their personal lives from the public. He makes Chuck Robb look like an unfit candidate for senator because he's not trustworthy. The irony behind this is that North lied to the entire country and even put lives at stake, but is attacking this man for keeping a mistress a secret. The only viable argument he has in this situation is that the Iran-Contra Scandal was in the past, and we need to move on and look at the present. Does this justify his attacks on Robb? No.

After looking back on it, I realized that I really only paid attention to the fallacies that North was committing. I wasn't paying any attention to any specific editing techniques. This week I'd like to pay a little more attention to see if the editing crew has any effect on the viewers' opinions of North. Is this a legitimate documentary or are there some techniques in the same vein as Michael Moore?

Sources:
Oliver North, Iran-Contra Scandal. Photograph. Scrape TV News. Web. .

Perfect Candidate. Photograph. Actual Reality Pictures. Web. .

Stewart, Jon. The Daily Show Episode #9002 (7/7/04). Television.