I had been thinking independently about our ability to forget things that happened, specifically, events that clearly were wrong, that crossed the line. It seemed to me during the 2000 election recount that the media's narrative was being orchestrated. Shockingly, after the Supreme Court decision, the media simply said, "Time to move on," end of reporting: "Here's the new story." And everyone forgot.

I had been thinking independently about our ability to forget things that happened, specifically, events that clearly were wrong, that crossed the line. It seemed to me during the 2000 election recount that the media's narrative was being orchestrated. Shockingly, after the Supreme Court decision, the media simply said, "Time to move on," end of reporting: "Here's the new story." And everyone forgot.

A politician without money for advertising is out of luck. They are not taken seriously.

The problem of media/politics is multifold. Many things are out of whack.

The media companies control whether a candidate gets "coverage" - which itself is tied to the knowledge of how much he or she has raised. The networks then know how much money the candidate is likely to spend on commercial airtime buys - so, this is a reinforcing system of legal corruption and quid pro quo news coverage.

The problem for independent filmmakers is that huge companies control all the promotion, all the advertising. Hollywood films' advertising budgets are as large as their shooting budgets.

In-depth reporting is expensive. It is much cheaper to have people sit around or on remotes and talk about politics like it's baseball. But there is also a predetermined intent in terms of what is reported and how it is reported, and the degree to which a story is pushed. Both have bad effects.