Are We Calling this a Win???

[thatguyoverthere]

NRA-ILA has a news article about the Katie Couric "documentary" "Under the Gun" now having a "caution" statement listed for the program on the IMDb on-line movie database.

An excerpt from the NRA-ILA article says:

In any event, the iMDB movie website now lists this caution about the so-called documentary: “there was a pause edited into the movie following pro-gun enthusiasts being asked a question on background checks. The producers claimed it was for ‘dramatic effect’ but in reality the pro-gun enthusiasts responded almost immediately. This led many to question the film and Katie Couric’s integrity.”

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016082 ... fire-again

So, I thought: "Neat. I want to go look at that." So I followed the link supplied in the NRA-ILA article to go look at the program info in IMDb.

Sure enough, the disclaimer is there. But, it's shown under the heading "Trivia" in the section "Did You Know." Even then you have to click on a "See More>>" link to get to the statement that the NRA-ILA article is bragging about.

BUT, in the main section of the IMDb description of the (so called) documentary, this is how the program is described under the (main) Storyline heading:

A drastic rise in mass shootings has ripped across the US in recent years. Despite a growing body count and the chorus of outrage that comes with it, America has failed to respond. The film explores why this is and how the firearms industry's lobbying group, the National Rifle Association, has developed a stranglehold on the politics of the issue. Searing and powerful, Under the Gun ultimately gives a human face to a crisis that is scarring the conscience of a nation.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5275886/?ref_=tttr_tr_tt

I know that those of us "in the know" understand what this so called documentary really is. But there are certainly many people who do NOT understand the problems with this program, and will look at the IMDb information to make a determination about it before actually watching it (and possibly believing it).

So am I wrong to think that this is a real stretch for the NRA-ILA to be celebrating that this "caution" statement was added to the description, being found only in an area that many people will not search, and only after multiple clicks to get to it? Are we getting that desperate for a "win"?

[SewTexas]

trivia is added by users, description is added by imdb. at least I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

[thatguyoverthere]

trivia is added by users, description is added by imdb. at least I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

Even worse then in my view. But at least that would explain the wide discrepancy between the program description in the Storyline section and the "caution" statement in the Trivia section.

[jmorris]

trivia is added by users, description is added by imdb. at least I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

Even worse then in my view. But at least that would explain the wide discrepancy between the program description in the Storyline section and the "caution" statement in the Trivia section.

Actually you can submit edits/changes for Plot Outlines, Plot Summaries, Keywords, Genres and Tags if you have an IMDB account. It's not automatically posted but goes to the staff first for review.

Any summary update that basically ripped the film a new one would probably not fly, but one that didn't have the hyperbole of the current one, while mentioning the controversies surrounding it, might.

[bblhd672]

I automatically deem any "documentary", tv show, news report or other story about firearms by the mainstream media to be probable fraud, lies and distortions of the truth.

[Abraham]

Katie Couric's anti-gun propaganda misleadingly labeled a documentary is laughable from a pro-gun perspective for it's anti-gun transparency.

The anti-gun folks just love this kind of deception.

Nothing has to be truthful for these folks as long as it's anti-gun...