As I have mentioned here before, one of the studies I am working on evaluates the impact of documentary film across audiences, news coverage, and policy contexts. I have written short introductions or columns on this topic in the past with a focus on Inconvenient Truth. While searching around for additional data, I ran across this survey report from Kaiser on the impact of Michael Moore's SICKO.
If the potential impact of Michael Moore's documentary "Sicko" were dependent solely on those who have actually seen the film, the result might be a passionate but narrow conversation among the 4% of adults who said they watched it in a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll.
But, with a big free media bounce reaching beyond the movie reviews to the news and talk shows, the new poll finds that almost half (46%) had seen the movie or heard or read something about it a little over a month after its national release. This is not much less than the share of adults (61%) who were aware of "An Inconvenient Truth," the documentary on climate change featuring former Vice President Al Gore released in May 2006.
Among those familiar with "Sicko," 45% said they had a discussion with friends, co-workers, or family about the U.S. health system as a result of the movie; 43% said they were more likely to think there is a need to reform the health system; 37% were more likely to think other countries have a better approach to health care; and 27% said they were paying more attention to the positions of presidential candidates on health care. About equal numbers of those aware of the movie thought it accurately represents problems in the U.S. health system (36%) versus overstating them (33%), and positive impressions of "Sicko" outweighed negative ones 48% to 33%.
- Log in to post comments
Matt, do you see Sicko as a good example of persuasive media? If so, is its polemical nature (e.g., trying to get health care for veterans in Cuba) a help or hindrance to its message?
I wonder why only 37% were more likely to think other countries have better health care after Moore presents France, Canada, Britain and Cuba as offering universal free health care. What would it take to raise that percentage? Isn't it obvious that other countries are doing a better job?
Because many respondents already thought this was the case, before they saw the movie? Survey questions are funny things, and have to be carefully worded.
I was searching for information on the Australian Health Care system a while back, and came across this article:
http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/179_09_031103/lee100203_fm.html
Here's what was interesting:
That strikes me as a perfect definition of the free market philosophy. I wonder what the ratio of those definitions are in the US populace compared to the rest of the world.