From: moviePig <>
Subject: Re: Disney vs. LA Times
Full headers:
Subject: Re: Disney vs. LA Times
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <otsfd6$77k$>
From: moviePig <>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 10:24:32 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <otsfd6$77k$>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <5a03224b$0$18141$b1db1813$>
Organization: Unlimited download news at
X-Trace: DXC=7emHT6?2HNjJRZZkg^aP1jL?0kYOcDh@jYkk[:k07I@k?^LZa[SVc^e6[[j\00_4>nOeVCDoJ<H1e_4C62j=]g8m0_IE_Ki_JemiZkK5V;eOoe
Print Article
Forward Article
On 11/7/2017 9:19 AM, Obveeus wrote:
> To sum it up:
> The Los Angeles Times wrote a story about Anaheim not benefiting from 
> the tax credits given to Disney's Park system.
> Disney has retaliated by denying Los Angeles Times reporters access to 
> advance screenings of Disney films like THOR RAGNAROK.
> In counter-retaliation, the National Society of Film Critics, the Los 
> Angeles Film Critics Association, The New York Film Critics Circle, and 
> the Boston Society of Film Critics have banned all Disney films from 
> their award eligibility.
> The writer of this article claims that banning a Los Angeles film critic 
> from advanced screenings of the film is a violation of the First 
> Amendment.  You'd think that journalists would have at least some 
> understanding of what the First Amendment is about...and as a hint, it 
> isn't about a journalist's 'right' to see movies before the rest of the 
> public can see them.

Well, it does sound like a violation of the *spirit* of the First 
Amendment.  Generally, press-events ought not hand-pick the press.


- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...