Those who watch the documentary will likely be disgusted with the way the kings of tort are portrayed as manipulating the legal system for their own pecuniary gain. . . . However, . . ., InJustice is crippled by one major problem – films funded and promoted by special interests groups can never paint the whole picture or be relied upon as an objective account of a societal problem.
. . . InJustice, like Hot Coffee, is an opinion piece, using stories of a few to draw categorical inferences on the system as a whole.
Not only does Kelly [the director of InJustice] exhibit a potential bias against the legal system . . ., so too does the film’s principal sponsor, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its Institute for Legal Reform. . . .[which] is never specifically acknowledged as a producer or funding source in the film’s credits (although it is promoting the film and noting its support on its websites here and here). Accordingly, it will be very difficult for InJustice to maintain its sense of independence and credibility, particularly in light of recent criticism by people like Saladoff [the director of Hot Coffee] who contend that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is mounting a secret campaign to influence public opinion on the judicial system. In fact, InJustice may play right into their hands.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
On Sunday, I let you know of a new film called InJustice and promised I would post my thoughts on it. Unfortunately, Mother Nature intervened and I was not able to see the movie! Because of a storm that left my house (along with more than 300,000 others) without power for more than a day I missed the first showing of the movie last night. However, the Abnormal Use blog has posted a very good comment on it here. Make sure you go and read the full review (and the comment left by one of the blog's readers), which suggests my suspicion about InJustice might be correct. Here are a few highlights: