Is It Censorship or Just Business?

Michael Moore’s verbal volleys with Walt Disney Co. regarding distribution of his anti-Bush documentary (“Miramax Won’t Distribute Moore’s ‘9/11,’ ” May 6) display a gross misunderstanding of both the purpose of a corporation and the responsibilities of its executives.

In interviews, Moore claims that media companies exist “to allow all voices to be heard” and that by refusing to air his controversial piece, they are violating “the public trust.”

This claim is patently false. Media companies, like all corporations, exist to maximize returns for their shareholders. The “trust” we place in executives is the promise to protect our investments in their companies, a commandment of corporate law.

Daniel Lyons

Cambridge, Mass.

*

So Disney decides not to distribute “Fahrenheit 9/11.” Surprise? One of the bedrocks of democracy is the freedom to express all ideas, no matter how controversial.

When ideas are suppressed, our freedoms are diluted. Too bad corporate interests, via their government connections, are dictating American information.

George Orwell’s disturbing “1984” vision becomes more familiar with each passing day.

George Colby Allerton

Benedict Canyon

*

Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) has called for Senate hearings on “politically based corporate censorship.”

Although I think Disney’s decision is financially unwise, I would be the first to defend the company’s right to make it.

I would remind Lautenberg and Michael Moore that the 1st Amendment protects us from state censorship -- and the free market, not some government cadre, should govern the decisions of film distribution.

Nick Buccola

Pasadena