336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 112:
Line 112: − + + +
→Earnings
Why does the sentence under the section Earning says "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00." when the citation given states $168,070,886? Also, the usage of the word "bilk" is subjective. Even though his films are not proper "documentaries", it doesn't mean he defrauded the public. I'm removing the sentence. [[User:ATang|ATang]] 10:20, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
Why does the sentence under the section Earning says "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00." when the citation given states $168,070,886? Also, the usage of the word "bilk" is subjective. Even though his films are not proper "documentaries", it doesn't mean he defrauded the public. I'm removing the sentence. [[User:ATang|ATang]] 10:20, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
:(A) Asked and answered on the page; (B) the sentence specically says "worldwide," the chart specifically cites "US Gross;" (C) the link provided specifically references the same language, idea, and concept. (D) the term "bilked" is commonly understood to mean defraud, cheat, swindle, thwart, frustrate, or hoax.
:(A) Asked and answered on the page; (B) the sentence specifically says "worldwide," the chart specifically cites "US Gross;" (C) the link provided specifically references the same language, idea, and concept. (D) the term "bilked" is commonly understood to mean defraud, cheat, swindle, thwart, frustrate, or hoax.
:Now, if you absolutely demand reputable and credible citations to support the claim, "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00," that certainly is no large demand, and we'd being only too willing to do so. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:44, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
:Now, if you absolutely demand reputable and credible citations to support the claim, "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00," that certainly is no large demand, and we'd being only too willing to do so. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:44, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
::I asked essentially the same question (elsewhere) some time back so clearly it was confusing. I have now made a change to hopefully make the distinction more obvious. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:52, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
::I asked essentially the same question (elsewhere) some time back so clearly it was confusing. I have now made a change to hopefully make the distinction more obvious. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:52, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
:The earnings was a gross oversight on my part (missed US and worldwide). The definition you gave for "bilk" doesn't justify its use - how did Moore cheat the public that money? Even though Moore provided a very one-sided, often slanderous, and sometimes factually inaccurate story, that doesn't mean he bilked the public of the money. It is a Hollywood movie, where people pay for entertainment (if the public decides to blindly trust it as fact... then that's really their fault). Saying Moore bilked the public money is like saying the new Transformers bilked the public money because it didn't follow the original cartoon, or saying Live Free or Die Hard cheated the public because of its misrepresentation of certain technologies prominently displayed (i.e. The hovering capabilities and weapons of the F-35). [[User:ATang|ATang]] 11:56, 26 July 2007 (EDT)