North Korea Muzzles Sony

[GostHacked]

People should also be talking about the criminals who are enacting NK's wishes here - the hackers. These are teenagers and nerds who live among us, presumably doing this for money.

The thing you need to understand Mike, is that many nations have a military cyber warfare division. We just don't hear to much about how our guys are screwing things up elsewhere.

[BubberMiley]

Freedom of speech is not letting others tell you what to say or do and allowing them to engage in criminal acts in order to stop you.

Then what stops you from calling the bikers morons?

[overthere]

If it is so bad, why were they promoting the crap out of it? Don't they know good movies from bad ones? It may be a turkey but I'm not buying it as the reason for delaying release. It will be interesting to see where they go from here. The Koreans are bound to find out that they aren't the only ones who can leak stuff.

They are promoting the crap out of it because they want to get whatever they can back from a large investment of money.

Is there any other reason for promoting any movie?

It would not be the first time a crap flick has been delayed because it is crap. Make no mistake, this gong show will sell tickets and it will end up in theaters. Notoriety sells, obviously.

Of more danger to Sony is that if the movie itself was hacked, it will end up on the Internet free and easily seen. The lost box office would be expensive.

[Wilber]

Then what stops you from calling the bikers morons?

I should think the reason is obvious. Are you saying the media shouldn't discuss the activities of criminal biker gangs?

Edited December 18, 2014 by Wilber

[Wilber]

They are promoting the crap out of it because they want to get whatever they can back from a large investment of money.

Is there any other reason for promoting any movie?

It would not be the first time a crap flick has been delayed because it is crap. Make no mistake, this gong show will sell tickets and it will end up in theaters. Notoriety sells, obviously.

Of more danger to Sony is that if the movie itself was hacked, it will end up on the Internet free and easily seen. The lost box office would be expensive.

The Koreans gave this movie publicity it could never buy and has guaranteed it will make tons. I probably wouldn't have bothered with it but now I would go see it on principle. Sony should get it into the theaters before it is hacked.

[BubberMiley]

I should think the reason is obvious. Are you saying the median shouldn't discuss the activities of criminal biker gangs?

Again, the median can say what they want but they should expect there might be consequences from what they say, even if those consequences are illegal and immoral. It might be prudent for them to weigh what they say based on the possible result. It seems hypocritical for you to tell them they should go ahead and say what they wish without weighing the consequences while you stay silent on the sidelines.

[overthere]

The Koreans gave this movie publicity it could never buy and has guaranteed it will make tons. I probably wouldn't have bothered with it but now I would go see it on principle. Sony should get it into the theaters before it is hacked.

Making tons of money will depend mostly on how good or bad the movie is, but you are right in one sense.

It will earn more at the box now than if it had not had official North Korean condemnation and some criminal activity pre-release.

[Wilber]

Again, the median can say what they want but they should expect there might be consequences from what they say, even if those consequences are illegal and immoral. It might be prudent for them to weigh what they say based on the possible result. It seems hypocritical for you to tell them they should go ahead and say what they wish without weighing the consequences while you stay silent on the sidelines.

I'm not staying silent. I would support Sony if they decided to show this thing. The bottom line is they have knuckled under to threats by criminals. They may be able to mitigate that by releasing it some other way but the reality is, Korea got away with a crime and something that could well be considered an act of war against the US.

[Wilber]

Making tons of money will depend mostly on how good or bad the movie is, but you are right in one sense.

It will earn more at the box now than if it had not had official North Korean condemnation and some criminal activity pre-release.

I don't think it matters whether it is good or bad. It would have before all this happened but not now.

[overthere]

No, hype alone cannot guarantee box office success. But it can help.

Heavens Gate, anybody? No, I didn't think so.

[overthere]

Here is a list of some whoppers in the loss department. They would all have big promo budgets and hype, naturally.

I was surprised to see Hugo, not a bad flick and won or was nominated for Oscars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_box_office_bombs

[Wilber]

You have to consider where the publicity is coming from. I agree that studios spending millions to hype a film is no guarantee of success but this is coming from one of the most despised dictators on the planet. He hates it. No amount of money can buy that kind of hype. If nothing else, this film is guaranteed to become a cult classic.

[BubberMiley]

I would support Sony if they decided to show this thing. The bottom line is they have knuckled under to threats by criminals.

And yet it's obvious why you don't call bikers morons? Aren't you buckling to potential threats by criminals?

[Wilber]

And yet it's obvious why you don't call bikers morons? Aren't you buckling to potential threats by criminals?

As you clearly can't comprehend the difference between insulting a group of bikers in a parking lot and an editorial written about their activities or a movie that is a parody of them, I guess there is no point in going further. I suppose you think Eastwood's Every Which Way but Loose and its sequel should have also been gassed because they made fun of bikers.

[Big Guy]

Terrorism works, threats work. That is why they are used.

To use this movie as an example, the last declaration implied that there would be something bad happening at Christmas when and where the movie was to be shown. If you and your family are movie goers and had a choice of what theater you would go to, would you attend a screening of this movie?

Would you encourage family members to attend that theater?

With all the choices available, I would not encourage my children or grandchildren to attend. In my younger years I might have attended by myself to prove a point but I no longer try to prove points.

Terror works.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Big Guy

[Wilber]

It works if you sucomb to it. Then you will always be its slave.

[BubberMiley]

As you clearly can't comprehend the difference between insulting a group of bikers in a parking lot and an editorial written about their activities or a movie that is a parody of them, I guess there is no point in going further. I suppose you think Eastwood's Every Which Way but Loose and its sequel should have also been gassed because they made fun of bikers.

Once again again, I don't think anything should have been gassed.

I think that if they felt that there might be negative repercussions from making fun of bikers in the Clint Eastwood movie and that people might be in danger as a result, it might be prudent for them to consider whether it's worth it to release the movie. To me, that's a similar situation to determining there might be negative repercussions from making fun of bikers in a parking lot, so it might be prudent for me to consider whether it's worth it to call them morons.

If there is an obvious difference that I'm not getting, please explain if you can.

[Boges]

Lizzy Caplan looked really nice in the trailers.

[Wilber]

Once again again, I don't think anything should have been gassed.

I think that if they felt that there might be negative repercussions from making fun of bikers in the Clint Eastwood movie and that people might be in danger as a result, it might be prudent for them to consider whether it's worth it to release the movie. To me, that's a similar situation to determining there might be negative repercussions from making fun of bikers in a parking lot, so it might be prudent for me to consider whether it's worth it to call them morons.

If there is an obvious difference that I'm not getting, please explain if you can.

So media shouldn't do anything that might cause others to commit violent or illegal acts. Well that rules out 50% if television and 90% of video games.

[BubberMiley]

So media shouldn't do anything that might cause others to commit violent or illegal acts. Well that rules out 50% if television and 90% of video games.

How many times do I have to say they can do whatever they want? Once again again again, you are free to go call a bunch of bikers morons. It is wrong for them to beat you up for doing that. But you should not be surprised that they beat you up, and it doesn't compromise the idea of free speech for you to decide to keep quiet in the first place.

I didn't think you could answer my question, but I thought the concept was simple enough that you would eventually understand.

Edited December 18, 2014 by BubberMiley

[Boges]

This does set a bad precedent. It shows that you can silence the media by threatening them if they are saying or doing something you don't like.

[BubberMiley]

This does set a bad precedent. It shows that you can silence the media by threatening them if they are saying or doing something you don't like.

That isn't a precedent. That happens all the time.

[Wilber]

How many times do I have to say they can do whatever they want? Once again again again, you are free to go call a bunch of bikers morons. It is wrong for them to beat you up for doing that. But you should not be surprised that they beat you up, and it doesn't compromise the idea of free speech for you to decide to keep quiet in the first place.

I didn't think you could answer my question, but I thought the concept was simple enough that you would eventually understand.

So anything is OK until someone threatens you. Then it's not. Sorry but no. We are not speaking of individuals in a parking lot but a despot using terror to restrict what you can say. This is not about playground bullies.

My father and my mothers father before him went to war with people who were just like that. You may think it is OK to piss away the legacy they and their generations left us but I don't.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Wilber

[Boges]

That isn't a precedent. That happens all the time.

Cite an example of a country trying and succeeding to silence the media of another country.

If ISIS could find a hacker that could do this, who would they threaten?

[BubberMiley]

So anything is OK until someone threatens you. Then it's not.

No, anything is OK but you might want to consider who might threaten you as a result and whether you're prepared to deal with the consequences.

Sorry but no. We are not speaking of individuals in a parking lot but a despot using terror to restrict what you can say. This is not about playground bullies.

We're not entirely sure it's not just teenage hackers pretending they're defending North Korea's honour because that would be hilarious. But even if it is a despot, you fail to explain why it's different---just that it is. Use your words and clarify.

My father and my mothers father before him went to war with people who were just like that. You may think it is OK to piss away the legacy they and their generations left us but I don't.

Your father's mother would probably think it's a stupid idea to choose to release a comedy that enflames international relations and threatens war, having gone through one.