Not-so-free speech

Brother Drudge indicates that "Disney/Miramax [are] set to release [a] film depicting [members of the] America[n] military as drug dealers; criminals..." According to the opus' Director, Gregor Jordan:

"Here in the UK no one gets upset, but over there, where the President is fighting these military campaigns in the name of democracy, the first casualty seems to be freedom of speech, the cornerstone of any democracy."

And, according to the film's star, Joaquin Phoenix:

"I don't know why anyone would be offended. It wasn't a movie that was intended to offend. And if we don't show things as they really happen, then what's that about? Censorship!"

I'm as high on free speech as the next blogger. And, I realize that the "free" part doesn't refer to the cost it takes to get that speech out amongst hoi polloi.

However, don't movies kinda blur the line between the already blurred line between commercial and non-commercial speech?

Isn't a movie that costs millions of dollars to make and advertise, and that is expected to earn a profit, much more of a commercial venture than an "artistic" one? Isn't it a bit like referring to the speech content of a line of breakfast cereals?

Just something for Joaquin to think about.

Celebrities · Sun, 07/13/2003 - 20:46 · · Importance: 1