Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts

Why Wal*Mart Works and why this makes some people C-R-A-Z-Y (2005) Review

Why Wal*Mart Works and why this makes some people C-R-A-Z-Y (2005)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
This film pulls together all of the arguments in favor of wal-mart. There is also a very interesting conclusion on the undeniable good work that the company did in summer 2005 in the Katrina-ravaged regions. However, none of the legitimate concerns of critics are given any thoughtful review. I say this as a concerned conservative, who wants to understand the enormous changes occuring in my country, and not a liberal.
On the plus side, it is hard to argue against the business model of wal-mart: it offers everyday low prices, which the company accomplishes by incredible and continual productivity gains - by some measures wal-mart is responsible for 25% of the productivity gains in the US due to its use of new technologies! - as well as vast scale economies in particular with globalisation. Regardless of what critics say, these factors are the basis of the company's success: consumers chose to buy there because of the prices and convenience.
However, this is the point when the film becomes disingenuous. Anything that critics say is summarily dismissed by either a single and simplistic example, by some self-appoined talking head, by employees who like their jobs, or simply by people passing by on the street. I found this pathetically unconvincing. For example, because wal-mart is criticised as a destructive force against traditional town centers, the filmmakers find one town that was able to renew itself as a tourist spot with boutiquie stores and then assumes that that can happen everywhere (but the site was in the Blue Mountains, not in the Oklahoma dustbowl). No statistics are offered, no additional proof, and no counter-arguments are acknowledged.
Moreover, it is easy to find people to spout the opinion you want to espouse by looking for them - to be sure, wal-mart critics do the same, but there are some critics who act like journalists and try to see what truth there is in the arguments advanced. This film does not. At one point, the filmakers interview a group of teenagers who state wal-mart wages would "enough" for them (none of them work there), as if that refutes the experience of single mothers trying to make ends meet on wal-mart salaries! They also get a few people to state that they never get asked to work overtime wothout pay as if that eliminates the need to investigate the claims of thousands of others who are winning multi-million dollar class-action lawsuits against that practice in their wal-marts.
Finally, some of the talking heads make the most ridiculous arguments. One of them dismissed all the arguments of critics who charge that wal-mart urges its workers to use the welfare system as "those who advocate government health care anyway" - as if that negates their arguments! By glossing over the details, they don't even make the case in favor of the wal-mart business model all that well, let alone consider how the intallation of a wal-mart impacts entire communities.
As such, this film is for the convinced, for those who want to have their opinions reinforced rather than challenged. That makes it like Fox news at its worst: you know what you are going to get before you switch it on - pure opinion and little reporting - so why bother? It isn't for learning. The costs behind wal-mart's methods are not even open to question. The one thing I took away from this is the sincerity of some of the employees, who genuinely believed in the company.
Overall, I cannot recommend this film, except as a pure ideological view in favor of this controversial company. This doesn't do anyone any good - there is no chance for dialogue in this approach, no acknowledgment that critics can make legitimate points. Whether powerful companies like it or not, they do not automatically deserve our trust, but instead our critical and constant scrutiny.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Why Wal*Mart Works and why this makes some people C-R-A-Z-Y (2005)

The world's largest family consists of the nearly 1,300,000 people who work for Wal-Mart and service nearly 138-million shoppers every week.Consumers love a bargain, and their quest to save money has helped build Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. into the world's top retailer.From the company's humble beginnings in rural Arkansas to its leadership position in the economy, Wal-Mart has earned both a legion of supporters and a score of detractors.Some claim that Wal-Mart's "always low prices" is bad for competitive retailers, while others feel that consumers should be allowed to decide with their pocketbooks.Regardless, no one can deny that Wal-Mart has made an impressive impact on America while helping millions of families and shoppers on a budget.Documentary producers Ron and Robert Galloway present an insider's look at the world's largest company, and how Wal-Mart's quest for better pricing has created new efficiencies in distribution and an overall stronger marketplace.What makes Wal-Mart work?Is it better pricing, convenience, quality and selection?Perhaps, but the Galloways discover that the incredible family of Wal-Mart Associates may well be the company's greatest asset of the all."We didn't get where we are today by being like everyone else and driving the middle of the road.We became Wal-Mart by being different, radically different" – Wal-Mart C.E.O. Lee Scott

Buy Now

Click here for more information about Why Wal*Mart Works and why this makes some people C-R-A-Z-Y (2005)

Read More...

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008) Review

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Now that the DVD is out, how does it differ from the film version? Even though Vivendi/ Premise won the lawsuit that Yoko Ono filed against the film for using ten seconds of John Lennon's "Imagine", the reference has been cut out of the video. I greatly respected Yoko as a performance artist and had the original records of Two Virgins and Plastic Ono Band. How very sad if a great modern artist's only interest now is gathering greenbacks. More on this in Steve Turner's excellent and revealing The Gospel According to the Beatles, which is full of absolutely unknown Beatlemania.
If anyone actually watched Expelled, they'd see that it's not "thinly disguised creationism" but rather about the freedom to challenge entrenched views. Certain sectors are always taking the church to task for supposedly limiting Galileo's freedom of inquiry and speech (in a vastly distorted account of what actually happened). Hello! Exactly the same thing is happening now, although they seem rather more silent when the shoe is on the other foot. Ben Stein is merely trying to restore the freedoms of speech and inquiry guaranteed in the US constitution to the realm of academia and the hugely controlled "Big Science" of public science foundations and those funded by philanthropic grants, including the Smithsonian Institute, National academy of Science, and the National Science Foundation.
After seeing Expelled in a theater, I wrote a long review of it elsewhere on the web. Now I see it's sparked a rather lively debate among reviewers. Actually, among those who, by their own admission, haven't seen it. One reviewer asks why people are voting against his review (which is against the film). Probably for the same reason people are voting against my review of Dawkins' book: not because the review is "not helpful" but as a way of voting for or against the book or film, as it were.
Having said that, it's probably as impossible to be neutral about this film as about Michael Moore's Farenheit 911 or an Oliver Stone fictionmentary. In my view, however, it's a fine piece of film making. Witty, irreverent, inventive, thoughtful, and Ben Stein is at his likeable, deadpan best. A friend I watched it with said just the opening titles were better than most films he'd seen recently, and I'm inclined to agree. If this film had had the opposite message, I think it would be getting an Academy Award and the New York Times wouldn't stop raving about it (instead of at it).
That's all well and good, one may be saying, but you haven't said anything about the subject. No, and I'd really rather not. If you hold a view generally called these days "Neo-Darwinism" you probably still will after seeing the film. If you incline to an idea called "Intelligent Design", you'll still incline so. If you're interested in battles between factions of the Academy in universities, however, or in free speech and press versus censorship (and this would likely be the topic of many reviews if this film had a different viewpoint), here's an engaging look at the salvos flying back and forth in a social and intellectual debate that much of the media have to date declined to cover.
One interesting thing came out of this film, and that was a test case for "fair use" in relation to copyright laws, an idea everybody knows about, but which seems generally undefined. It concerned Yoko's suing Ben Stein and the producers for using a snippet of John Lennon's song "Imagine". Hasn't everyone and their dog used that song? Yes, but here it wasn't used to sell tennis shoes, but to be considered critically. Again, if the film had the opposite viewpoint, I don't think there would have been a suit, but the outcome was to define "fair use" in its original intent, so that common Joes and Janes don't have to fear cadres of corporate lawyers merely for referring to copyrighted songs, books, films and other materials.
As the film shows, the use of Darwin's ideas to support Nazi ideology and eugenics was almost universal during and following the Victorian era, and was generally known as "social Darwinism". One may argue that these were actually Huxley's ideas, or that Darwin borrowed heavily from Alfred Wallace, but whatever their pedigree, they were pressed into service nearly at once. G.K. Chesterton wrote tirelessly against the Nazis as they were beginning to come to power, attempting to expose their plan of eugenics. In reference to another reviewer, I have read Mein Kampf (sp.) also, and Hitler's plan was entirely based on "social Darwinism". So were the ideas of Margaret Sanger and numerous other crusaders for what was known as "scientific planning". Numerous authors have pointed out the racist motivations behind the Royal Society in Britain and the ages of Victorian and Edwardian exploration, in which races were contrasted in elaborate displays during the world expositions and fairs.
This was also the motivation in the Soviet Union, which forced a famine in order to coerce farmers onto state cooperatives. When Malcolm Muggeridge exposed this plan in the 'thirties, in Chronicles of Wasted Time he was widely denounced by Soviet supporters in the media who wanted this experiment in social planning to succeed. Among these were the Fabian Socialists, Sydney and Beatrice Webb. But Beatrice Webb wrote in her diary in 1933: "(There was) another account of the famine in Russia in the Manchester Guardian (a British newspaper), which certainly bears out Malcolm's reports....Fortunately for the USSR, the attention of the capitalist countries is today concentrated on the Mad Dog of Europe-- Hitler's Germany."
This film may induce a sense of vertigo, being chocabloc full of information and history barely referenced in the media. The effect may be akin to sailing in a calm sea, only to find one has unaccountably hit an iceberg. Or rather the tip of an iceberg, and the film may spark curious viewers to explore the vast reaches submerged below.
Extras on the DVD include: a trailer for Fossil Hunter, a novel by John Olson with a "female Indiana Jones"; An Important Message from Ben Stein (in favor of free speech and inquiry); an advance notice for Expelled: The Book by David Berlinski, not yet released as of this writing; "Practical Applications", called on the DVD cover: "Using Intelligent Design for Medical Research" noting breakthroughs resulting from assuming an engineered, rather than a random process; Theatrical Trailer (Called: "Theatrical Super Trailer" on the cover); Bonus music tracks by Andy Hunter: "Stars", "Technicolour", "Out of Control". Related links include: Expelledthemovie.com and AcademicFreedomDay.com.
Expelled is written for a popular audience, and those with more interest or background may wish for more discussion of science. That comes in an interview with David Berlinski, author of A Tour of the Calculus and many other books, on a DVD called "The Incorrigible Dr. Berlinski". It's from Coldwater Media, the creators of Icons of Evolution, and may later have a general release. For now, it's available from intelligentdesign.org.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008)



Buy Now

Click here for more information about Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008)

Read More...