Quote:
|
The BBC is pretty good in this area. They seem to strive to uphold a more professional standards when it comes to serious topics, from what I've seen.
|
They're bound by charter to a high level of impartiality due to it being a publically funded organisation. They don't always maintain it, but they don't get away with op-ed/partisan 'campaigning' for long due to internal system of checks and balances overseeing their programming.
Moore understands that the US audience doesn't generally have the stomach for a straight, 2 hour documentary. The US audience, at that time, needed a little bit of jazz-hands to sweeten the pill.
A worthy, but dryly delivered documentary that no-one will watch is a documentary that's going to find it difficult to get green-lit.
Also, bear in mind that BfC, much as with Moore's other films, was an op-ed piece and not subject to the same levels of impartiality as we expect (though rarely get) from genuine news and current affairs outlets.
(Fwiw, even though I'm non-US, I'm in general agreement with Moore's position in BfC.)