Eisner, Moore and the truth

Even though I know about Michael Moore's slippery tactics in dealing with the media (even though he is media) and "the man" (even though he is now a man of wealth and power himself) I simply blogged what Moore had basically put out as a press release. And so did the New York Times, although they're not necessarily an organ with which I would want to be compared. A commenter left word that Moore had "made it all up". Hmm. I tried to check it out. Well, this is just evidence of how polarised not just the blogosphere but the whole online news world is. I found hundreds of right-wing sites (dittohead and jingoist, that is, not fascist or racist), mostly blogs, which trumpeted that Moore was guilty and Disney innocent, based on the fact, apparently (it's hard to extract facts from the rhetoric), that Moore had a year or so of advance notice that Eisner did not intend to allow Miramax to distribute his film. I know I don't really understand what misunderestimating is, and I am not stirred by pronouncements like "bring it on", but I think I do understand English, so how is that proof that Moore "made up" anything? All the purely left-wing sites were continuing to heedlessly follow Moore like lemmings and busily organising e-mail campaigns and boycotts to "fight censorship". Again, apologies for my literal mind, but how is a private corporation deciding where to spend its money, or a squabble between a millionaire and billionaire if you prefer to see it that way, censorship?
It took me at least 15 minutes, and that's an eon in Google searching time, to find a more or less balanced report of the story in The Salt Lake Tribune. Pah! A plague on both your houses. And I know I am going to have my liberal credentials pulled for saying this, but I don't like Moore's movies. Almost as much as I don't like Disney movies!