One more on the New York Times - they've got me boiling today:

Disney's Craven Behavior

Apparently the Times doesn't like the fact that Disney doesn't want to distribute Michael Moore's new documentary. They did finance it in the first place, so give them some credit. And besides, what right does the Times have to tell Disney to sacrifice themselves and their business results on the alter of Michael Moore's ego?

It would cost them a lot less money to put aside their partisanship on the arts and actually review Bill O'Reilly's book that was number one on their best seller list, instead of doing book reviews and cover stories on Al Franken only.

Finally, calling Moore's films documentaries is like calling reality TV shows documentaries. Just becuase something "real" is filmed does not mean that it's not manipulated or slanted to affect the emotions of the viewer. To me a documentary is non-partisan journalism or history (see Ken Burn's films).

Update: The Times allows Michael Eisner to respond.

Disney and Michael Moore