It is good to hear of a happy ending involving the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences when the highly-paid and pampered executives of the Academy are involved. It seems it must always fall to the members of the Academy, the creative people, to make up for the bad manners and dishonesty of the “suits.”

Your story reminded me of 75th Academy Awards in which Michael Moore received an Oscar for his documentary, “Bowling for Columbine.” The executives of AMPAS, the hired “suits,” not the members, had given microphones to stage hands with instructions to “boo” Michael Moore.

A link to one account:

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/274/

The scene as the reporter described it:

“Most of the Hollywood audience smiled and applauded, but stagehands, who were close to the microphones, booed loudly, making it appear to a television listener that Moore’s criticism of President Bush was not well received.”

Confused by the “boos” that came seemingly from nowhere, more and more Academy members (not the hired hands) joined in the applause. But then producer Gil Cates and director Louis Horvitz gave the order to cut Moore off and he was drowned out by the music.

But the members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences conducted themselves honorably and with a proper regard for artistic achievement.

Thus shall it always be.

Before I forget, there is one other thing to remember about that incident. CNN broadcast the Academy awards more than once for the benefit of different time zones. An anlaysis of the audio from the east coast CNN broadcast and the west coast CNN broadcast showed that CNN had manipulated the audio to make the “boos” for Michael Moore louder than they really were.

REG CROWDER
Freelance Business Journalist
London, UK & Brittany, France
http://www.RegCrowder.com
http://www.journalistdirectory.com/journalist/TgTQ/REG-CROWDER

The pure external objectivity you talk about, I believe, assumes a classical Newtonian view where reality is separate and apart from the observer. If we take a post-modern view where (whether a piece of art or a reported event) reality takes shape partly based on the observer (reader as well as reporter) then perhaps the reality of an event will continue to evolve as more people write, read and talk about it. I am not talking about bias or revisionist history but an actual shift of reality. I know this sounds strange or even absurd but no more so than the kind of existence/non-existence reality based on observation that Schrödinger talked about.
The cat is dead, long live the cat.

Siva

http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=recent&rid=20790