Scholastic pulls Path to 9/11 "Discussion Guide," saying, "[T]he materials did not meet our high standards"
September 07, 2006 5:52 pm ET
Facing intense criticism, including by Media Matters for America, over its "Discussion Guide for the Classroom" -- reportedly sent to high school teachers nationwide to aid in conducting discussions with students of ABC's "docudrama" The Path to 9/11 -- Scholastic Inc. announced on September 7 that it is removing the materials from its website, stating, "[T]he materials did not meet our high standards." In a press release, Scholastic further stated: "A new classroom discussion guide for high school students is being created and will focus more specifically on media literacy, critical thinking, and historical background." The company said the new materials will be made available September 8.
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Unlike the ABC suits.
BTW, found out the producer of this crap "docudrama" made a movie back in 2001. You know which one?
"Josie And The Pussycats."
Speaks volumes about the producer, doesn't it?
Of course they could always get Michael Moore to produce it. We all know what kind of lies he puts out that are claimed to be truths. So, now we have lies put out by the other side that are claimed to be truths. Let's see...the right is bashed for demonizing Moore and his outragous claims but the left is given sainthood elevations for demonizing the right and their movie.
Do all liberals perform such hypocricy on a daily basis, or do they do it just periodically?
We all know what kind of lies [Michael Moore] puts out that are claimed to be truths.
Do tell.
Exactly my point. Obviously, you seem to think he told NO lies. Have you ever watched "farenhype 9/11"? My point is that when a movie comes out that shows liberals and their leaders in a bad way it is claimed to be lies by the liberals and their leaders. When a movie comes out that shows liberals and their leaders in a good way then it is all good and no one can make any claims against it.
You couldn't have been better at helping me prove my point. Thanks
Your point remains unproven.
For anyone that can show a single inaccurate FACT in F-9/11 If you can do so then claim it and get back to us otherwise your baseless assertion is worthless.
"there is a 10,000$ reward...."
How do I collect??
[link to www.davekopel.com]
The movie lauds an anti-Bush riot that took place in Washington, D.C., on the day of Bush’s inauguration. He claims that protestors "pelted Bush's limo with eggs." Actually, it was just one egg, according to the BBC. According to Moore, "No President had ever witnessed such a thing on his inauguration day. " According to CNN, Richard Nixon faced comparable protests in 1969 and 1973. According to USA Today, the anti-Bush organizers claimed that they expected 20,000 protesters to show up, whereas the anti-Nixon protest in 1973 drew 60,000 people. (USA Today, Jan. 20, 2001).
Moore says, "The plan to have Bush get out of the limo for the traditional walk to the White House was scrapped. But according to the BBC, "Mr. Bush delighted his supporters by getting out of his limousine and walked the last block of the parade, holding hands with his wife Laura."
Fahrenheit mocks President Bush for continuing to read the book My Pet Goat to a classroom of elementary school children after he was told about the September 11 attacks. Actually, as reported in The New Yorker, the book was Reading Mastery 2, which contains an exercise called "The Pet Goat." The title of the book is not very important in itself, but the invented title of My Pet Goat makes it easier to ridicule Bush.
What Moore did not tell you:
Gwendolyn Tose’-Rigell, the principal of Emma E. Booker Elementary School, praised Bush’s action: "I don’t think anyone could have handled it better." "What would it have served if he had jumped out of his chair and ran out of the room?"… She said the video doesn’t convey all that was going on in the classroom, but Bush’s presence had a calming effect and "helped us get through a very difficult day."
rebuttal the last three time you guys tried his tripe. Google it and find for yourself. Normally the walk started where the limo stopped did Bush exit there? NO the walk you are talking about was the last hundred yards or so NOT the traditional walk its so weak. All of your nonsense is so weak. Hey the offer is there. Take your weak already debunked nonense to the source and claim the reward. I am sure MM can use the laughs.
That is sooo funny. How can anyone who feels that farenhiet 9/11 is gospel give an objective opinion on anything political? All you're going to have is personal opinion with no facts to back it up. farenhiet 9/11 has been debunked by everyone who has given it 20 seconds of thinking time. Everyone knows what Michael Moore did in this movie and what his purpose was. Democrats (including Clinton's political advisor) even came out and said that Moore's film was nothing more than lies with the intent on harming the Bush administration. The lies have been pointed out. I only had room for 2 minor ones. The rest are out there if you choose to find out the truth. But, somehow I doubt you are interested in truth.
First off, Michael Moore doesn't speak for the Democratic party, or even liberals in general. He is a filmmaker, and he sees it as his job to provoke controversy.
Even so, I have read the details of the so-called "lies" conservatives like to talk about, and I suspect most conservatives haven't. I don't personally know a single conservative who bothered to watch the film.
Most of the "lies" are not lies at all, but matters of spin. Most (not all) of the real, factual errors are fairly insignificant. On the whole, the TRUTHS pointed out in the film are extremely damning, and while unfortunate (whether intentional or honest mistakes), the few factual problems do not undermine the overall importance of the real facts.
Also, let us remember that Michael Moore was not working with Scholastic to have his film taught in schools as an honest, factual account of a moment in American history. I will not defend him or his errors, as I feel his film would have been better without all the attempts at emotional manipulation, but his mistakes do not excuse what ABC has attempted to do in this mini-series.
Truth wins one for a change.
…but I wouldn’t break out the Champaign just yet. I have my doubts about these newly discovered “high standards.” It will be interesting to see how they present these misplaced “high standards” in their new promotion of this movie. And I can’t help but ask where were these high standards when they decided promoting this movie was a valuable historical lesson. The only value I see would be a class on propaganda and crappy research skills.
I'll be interested to see the revised product. However, I believe Scholastic's full press release offers some promise. E.g., consider the stated subject of the first section of the new teaching materials...
1. Media Literacy - what is a docudrama; how does it differ from a documentary; what are the differences between factual reporting and a dramatization?
Of course, it's still up to the teacher to create an environment of honest debate and discussion. But being a strong advocate of the teaching of critical thinking at the high-school level, I believe these are exactly the type of questions which should be discussed.
I just reviewed the latest letter and study materials from Scholastic. I believe they did an excellent job. In fact, I applaud their approach more than I do spoonfeeding students the program's errors.
that is abc's defense. but the producer of this garbage was just on nbc nightly news talking about it's "accuracy". [ nbc reporter also tried to compare it to michael moore, there is no comparison, no network turned over five hours to him.] rush has been promoting the "amazing scene" that never happened, where the american troops had osama surrounded but the clinton people won't allow him to be captured. his sheep are going to believe him over some 10 second disclaimer. abc has been promoting this to schoolchildren and their parents. but how do you promote something that is false? this is not something about the reagans or marilyn and jfk forty years ago. we all remember the emotion of that day, the horror of watching people clinging to the towers and then jumping to a certain death. this is an event that has shaped our lives and will for many years. abc has turned over hours of prime time to republican partisans to show what is nothing but a false attack ad on democrats. they are attacking decent honorable people and trying to pin the blame for this horrendous event on them. at the same time, they are providing cover for the ones who really did nothing, the bush administration. no meetings, no orders given, no attention paid to the threats that the 9-11 commission said were "surging" that summer of 2001. it was bush who let bin ladin go at tora bora. we knew exactly where he was and there were troops in the area. he could have been captured. instead, the bush people let him and thousands of taliban fighters leave through the only pass that led into pakistan. this is an inexcusable disgrace for abc to allow this movie on their network, on the fifth anniversary, and do it under the pretense of the 9-11 report. cyrus nowrasteh, the writer and one of the producers, said that he had to do his "own research" because the report "only goes back to 1998". a total lie. it goes back many years before 1998. this so called "docudrama" is a lie, abc is deliberately promoting a lie, and anyone who defends it is lying.
Score one for the good guys!
our schoolkids will get some parity. Unfortunately, teachers are getting sacked for speaking truth to power, and kids are having to submit to a fingerprint scan to get their lunches. The control freaks want to implant rfid chips in newborns, so Gattica wasn't that far off the mark. Our kids are still going to be stuck with a multi-trillion dollar debt. If you factor all the promised payments to Social Security, veterans benefits and the like, not just the cash basis the gov't uses, our kids will have to be taxed around 70% to cover Bush's theft from the middle class. In 2007, all those ARMs-Adjustable Rate Mortgages reset and the housing market crashes, the dollar shortly after as all those US dollars in foreign countries come back to the US.
Sorry, got caught in a tangent there.
Actually the name is Gattaca. Gattica doesn't even make sense. ;-) Okay, back to work. Out.
It's good to see when MMFA's efforts get results (and those of others who are pressing this issue).
Keep up the pressure on ABC. In this day and age of digital editing they have plenty of time to make the changes needed before air time.
Docudrama or not, any treatment of the events of 9/11 should be held to the highest standards of accuracy.
this movie is simply another "swift boat" movie aired within 60days of an election to portray Democrats as "weak on terror", and if they can drag a whole new generation of voters into the RNC camp for '08 (think about it - if these kids in school are at least sophomores? Most of 'em will be legal to vote in 2 years which coincides with??? ).
Ever since the daily coundown of America Held Hostage day 356 that undermined president Carter and gave birth to Nightline I have always know that ABC is right wing. Rush Limbaugh is carried on ABC Disney owned radio stations all across the country. ABC radio in our city is right wing propaganda 24/7/365. Remember Sam Donaldson telling us that Reagan won the debates with Carter. This is no surprise to me.
But first Scholastic pulls the material off their site saying it doesn't "not meet our high standards for dealing with controversial issues".
Then in the very next breath, in a feeble attempt at self-justification, they claim the miniseries provides "a springboard to discussion about the issues leading up to 9/11, terrorism and the Middle East". It provides, says CEO Dick Robinson, a "very 'teachable moment'" for [of all things] "developing critical thinking and media literacy skills at the high school level".
How can this be? The miniseries itself notoriously offers no alternative views that students could pick and choose from in order to arrive at their own interpretation. There's no context or balance. Ultimately if the production is so defective that Scholastic feels it necessary to disassociate themselves from it, why would they then turn around and promote it as a "springboard to discussion" for anything? Are there no alternatives?
Of course, the only "springboard to discussion" going on here is about the gullibility of a publisher. They should take their own medicine and develop their own critical thinking skills long before they're unleashed on our high school students.
These people knew all along what they were doing in promoting this screed. Of COURSE the scholatist materials don't meet any high standards. For that matter, they don't meet any decent standards whatsoever, as they merely served to bolster the perception that would be framed after viewing "Path to 9/11" that it was all Clinton's fault, and that we should just give Bush a pass.
In essence, the neoconservative promoters of this piece of garbage were doing everything in their power to promote this movie for the sake of GOP propoganda and to help Republicans score a few points so close to the November mid-term elections. I hope to god that when the 5th anniversary of 9/11 finally arrives, that America will put her polarization and intense partisanship aside for one day, and honor ALL of those who lost their lives on that fateful day. It would make up for all the shameless exploitation by neoconservatives of the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans.
when Scholastic was supposed to have it down from their website, it is still up and running.
Hmmm..........