• Powered by
  • Newsvine:

 

 

Stories of struggle and recovery in America: Msnbc.com is focusing long-term coverage on the city of Elkhart, Ind. to provide perspective on the national recession. Follow our ongoing coverage on msnbc.com. Want to share your thoughts on the how the recession is playing out in Elkhart or in your community? Comment on any of the blog posts below or become a blog contributor. Learn how

Full coverage | Why Elkhart? | More about our team

Follow this project via ...
advertisement
{"contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"elkhartprojectblog"}

No overflow crowd for free look at Moore's new film

Despite free tickets, rabble rouser filmmaker Michael Moore’s new indictment of capitalism failed to rouse a full house in Elkhart, one of the 10 down and out American cities where Moore arranged gratis showings.

Although a good crowd started lining up well in advance of the screening at Carmike Encore Park, the primary theater never filled and a second theater, on standby to accommodate an overflow crowd, was not needed.

The movie drew a round of applause when it ended.

Click here to read Elkhart Truth reporter Tom Lange's coverage of the event.

{"contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"elkhartprojectblog"}
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
{"commentId":9835581,"authorDomain":"jbdaad"}
Despite free tickets, rabble rouser filmmaker Michael Moore’s new indictment of capitalism failed to rouse a full house in Elkhart, one of the 10 down and out American cities where Moore arranged gratis showings

Anybody check with people who did not go for reasons why? No ride, no gas, no interest etc.

{"commentId":9835581,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"jbdaad"}
  • 4 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 11:21 AM EDT
{"commentId":9835981,"authorDomain":"andrewchamp"}

Great point also.

{"commentId":9835981,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"andrewchamp"}
  • 3 votes
#1.1 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 11:36 AM EDT
{"commentId":9996528,"authorDomain":"ungerbn"}

Elkhart, Indiana?

You mean that place that has voted for Reaganomics, against its own interest, for 30 years?

What do you expect?

Duh.

{"commentId":9996528,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"ungerbn"}
  • 3 votes
#1.2 - Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:43 AM EDT
{"commentId":10022075,"authorDomain":"jbdaad"}
You mean that place that has voted for Reaganomics, against its own interest, for 30 years?

What do you mean?

{"commentId":10022075,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"jbdaad"}
  • 1 vote
#1.3 - Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:28 AM EDT
Reply
{"commentId":9835906,"authorDomain":"andrewchamp"}

Maybe it didn't pack a full house due to the lack of advertising that it was free. Also, I found out about it from MSNBC_Elkhart on twitter, came to this site, had to click to etruth to read full article, then go to a site to print the ticket, all to go see a movie that would be free for 1 day at 1 time. Lame. Don't knock the low attendence because it was a Michael Moore film.

Now, I enjoy his films, and don't necessarily agree w/ everything he says; but he makes good points, it's entertaining, and it's funny/ironic.

{"commentId":9835906,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"andrewchamp"}
  • 6 votes
Reply#2 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 11:34 AM EDT
Reply
{"commentId":9836030,"authorDomain":"pennytool"}

Anybody check with people who did not go for reasons why? No ride, no gas, no interest etc. ,

Bingo!

{"commentId":9836030,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"pennytool"}
  • 4 votes
Reply#3 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 11:38 AM EDT
{"commentId":9838480,"authorDomain":"juju011"}

Plus the site it was advertised on didn't say anything about a second screen AND said there were no more tickets available.

I would have went had the site said anything about the overflow screen. And I only found out about it like the night before the showing....maybe there would have been a better turnout had it been better advertised...I would have even given people rides.

{"commentId":9838480,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"juju011"}
  • 3 votes
Reply#4 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 1:03 PM EDT
{"commentId":9839282,"authorDomain":"upswing"}

Even if Michael Moore weren't a dishonest individual and a deceptive film maker, his status as a multimillionaire renders ineffectual any barbs he might send capitalism's way.

The guy is a walking hypocrisy.

{"commentId":9839282,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"upswing"}
  • 4 votes
Reply#5 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 1:28 PM EDT
{"commentId":9848253,"authorDomain":"juju011"}

But he does give you food for thought...Maybe just to see something in a new light. You don't have to agree with him, (I dont agree with much of it myself,) but he gets people talking about issues otherwise left of the conversation.

{"commentId":9848253,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"juju011"}
  • 2 votes
#5.1 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 8:02 PM EDT
{"commentId":9854240,"authorDomain":"upswing"}

jholderread:

but he gets people talking about issues otherwise left of the conversation.

I see where you're coming from. And I think it's a fair point.

The problem for me, though, is that most of the conversation he generates is about Michael Moore and not the issues he "reports" on.

{"commentId":9854240,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"upswing"}
  • 3 votes
#5.2 - Sat Oct 3, 2009 9:04 AM EDT
{"commentId":9860491,"authorDomain":"juju011"}

Depends on what YOU talk about not what THEY talk about....You can always lead the conversation.

{"commentId":9860491,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"juju011"}
  • 1 vote
#5.3 - Sat Oct 3, 2009 5:54 PM EDT
{"commentId":9863694,"authorDomain":"upswing"}

jholderread:

Depends on what YOU talk about not what THEY talk about....You can always lead the conversation.

Sure. But I can do that without Michael Moore having made a movie.

That being the case, what use is a Michael Moore movie when it generates among its viewers the choice that they can either talk about Moore or they can have a discussion that they could have without ever seeing his movies?

My problem is with Moore's focus on himself in his movies. He makes movies to aggrandize himself, not to give a solid insight into any important issue or event.

This might stem from him having such a success with Roger an Me, which worked wonderfully as a personal narrative.

But Moore doesn't have the same personal involvement in subsequent movies.

Rather, he shamefully coopts others to add that investment, others such as the disabled young man he so cynically dragged around bullet manufacturers as a prop in Columbine, or the sick folk he threw into a boat and had yell at Gitmo in Sicko.

Despite this lack of personal investment, however, Moore continues to offer movies built around personal narrative. That makes him a very one-dimensional and egotistical -- multimillionaire -- documentarian of the people.

I tend to put Moore in the same category as Spike Lee: One-Trick ponies who keep repeating their one trick over and over and over ...

{"commentId":9863694,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"upswing"}
  • 3 votes
#5.4 - Sat Oct 3, 2009 10:24 PM EDT
{"commentId":9866495,"authorDomain":"juju011"}

Alright, I see where you are coming from. However, the kid that was shot at Columbine did not have to participate in the production if he did not want to. I am sure some money was thrown at him to get him to do it. Or maybe he just wanted to get his side of the story out there.

I know alot of people hate Moore because of his views, but I try not to take his views on as my own. Kind of like the author Dan Brown. If you just take it for what it is, a book, then you can make up your own mind on the rest. I don't think a novel should be able to shape or change your religious beliefs either. DaVinci Code was just a good book that got turned into a good movie. I took it as nothing more. If people let men like Moore and Brown shake their beliefs, then they weren't that strong in them in the first place.

I wish I would have gotten to see the movie so we would have a bit more to talk about than just our opinion on Moore. You seem up for good conversation.

{"commentId":9866495,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"juju011"}
  • 1 vote
#5.5 - Sun Oct 4, 2009 7:19 AM EDT
{"commentId":9867609,"authorDomain":"upswing"}

jholerread:

However, the kid that was shot at Columbine did not have to participate in the production if he did not want to. I am sure some money was thrown at him to get him to do it. Or maybe he just wanted to get his side of the story out there.

The kid certainly would have had the choice, that's true. Personally, I would not have put him in the position of makign that choice in order to make a movie that I knew was nothing more than my personal and political statement.

I would have viewed doing so to be an indication that my movie wasn't going so well, and that I was having to resort to what I consider to be sensationalism to move the project forward.

I guess we all have our own level of tolerance for that kind of thing.

I'm actually not sure what Moore's point was in Columbine; his argument was all over the place from stating that Canada is a peaceful place because its citizens own guns to stating that the US was a violent place because people own guns ...

know alot of people hate Moore because of his views, but I try not to take his views on as my own. Kind of like the author Dan Brown. If you just take it for what it is, a book, then you can make up your own mind on the rest.

You make a good comparison; both "artists" have the patina of radicalising and educating in service of some larger, noble purpose, and both, in my opinion, are merely working for no reason other than their own enrichment.

It IS indeed up to us whether or not we accept a moviemaker's claims as being viable and true. No argument there.

And, yes, we certainly are responsible for our own "consumption" of media product. And we do all have the ability to modulate the effect that we allow that media consumption to have on us.

And it is this standard that I think that many Moore disciples fail to meet.

For instance, I have read Viners' comments extolling Moore's movie-making as some kind of Second Coming. They are deaf to any criticism of Moore, even the ordinary kind of criticism that assumes that nobody's artistic endeavor is ever perfect.

These people, I believe, are undermining their own credibility as alleged informed media consumers; they shut their minds down to criticism to make the argument that Moore has opened their minds up to something.

This irony is actually a little funny when you think about it.

It's similar to a six-year-old declaring: "I'm a grown up, and I'm going to stamp my feet and hold my breath untl you call me a grown up!!" -- The act of the argument defeats the claim of the argument.

I wish I would have gotten to see the movie so we would have a bit more to talk about than just our opinion on Moore. You seem up for good conversation.

Professionally (I'm a Media Law/Media Studies Prof at a university) it is my duty :-( to see these kinds of movies, so maybe we'll have more to say about it after it buzzes across the massive screen of the tiny town I live in.

In all honesty, I hope that that doesn't happen any time soon... :-)

Cheers.

{"commentId":9867609,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"upswing"}
  • 1 vote
#5.6 - Sun Oct 4, 2009 9:55 AM EDT
{"commentId":9940049,"authorDomain":"janiwest"}

upswing/jolerread:

A quick thank you.  Do have any idea how refreshing it is to see two people on a message board actually dissagree and comment with CIVILITY?  The fact that neither of you have tried to take this to "flame war" status is a breath of fresh air.  Reading your well thought out and courteous exchange has been both insightful and quite pleasant.

Thanks again.

{"commentId":9940049,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"janiwest"}
  • 1 vote
#5.7 - Thu Oct 8, 2009 9:55 AM EDT
{"commentId":9958914,"authorDomain":"juju011"}

There really is no need to get all worked up about it. I enjoy talking and listening to other floks ideas. It could spark something in me that I never saw or felt before. Others input is ALWAYS a good thing.

{"commentId":9958914,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"juju011"}
    #5.8 - Fri Oct 9, 2009 6:43 AM EDT
    {"commentId":10045130,"authorDomain":"studentsmc"}

    Duh-the majority of the media presents from ITS OWN POINT OF VIEW. The difference between Michael Moore and the most of the media including many film makers, is that Michael Moore shows a desire to elicit a public dialogue, which has almost disappeared in this country.

    {"commentId":10045130,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"studentsmc"}
    • 1 vote
    #5.9 - Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:03 PM EDT
    {"commentId":10069660,"authorDomain":"craig-k-smith"}

    Upswing#5: You mean capitalists aren't allowed to criticize the extremes of capitalism? Maybe in your PC little world.

    {"commentId":10069660,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"craig-k-smith"}
    • 1 vote
    #5.10 - Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:42 PM EDT
    {"commentId":10186978,"authorDomain":"voltaire-1422831Voltaire-1422831"}

    To the point that Michael Moore is a hypocrite because he participates in the capitalist system while at the same time he critizes/critiques it seems overly critical.

    Some"founding fathers" owned slaves and at the same time wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights...so they were actually even more hypocritical.

    {"commentId":10186978,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"voltaire-1422831Voltaire-1422831"}
      #5.11 - Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:56 PM EDT
      Reply
      {"commentId":9849363,"authorDomain":"seilertechco"}

      So give some of the details since most of us didn't see it. Is it depressing because we all know there are some serious problems not being dealt with and he's puts a few in our face? Is it funney? Does he see an absolutely huge debt with interest compounding away, consuming the republic? Does he show the lack of new business start ups to replace our reasonable paying jobs as lowering standards of living for most people for generations to come? Is he concerned with the amount of fraud in courts of law by attorneys and judges? Tell please.

      {"commentId":9849363,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"seilertechco"}
      • 2 votes
      Reply#6 - Fri Oct 2, 2009 9:26 PM EDT
      {"commentId":10045269,"authorDomain":"studentsmc"}

      You have the questions that are at the heart of this matter. But as of October 11, no one wants to answer you. I can not as I did not get to view this movie, though I intend to. I guess everyone else is "asleep at the wheel".

      {"commentId":10045269,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"studentsmc"}
        #6.1 - Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:09 PM EDT
        {"commentId":10073067,"authorDomain":"juju011"}

        I have not seen the movie yet either. As soon as I do though I am sure to have something to say about it. ;)

        {"commentId":10073067,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"juju011"}
          #6.2 - Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:03 AM EDT
          Reply
          {"commentId":9853937,"authorDomain":"ladyd1951"}

          Sometimes you are encouraged about our country's future when you see something like this.

          Specifically, there is an annual contest at Texas A&M University calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term.
          This year's term was

          "Political Correctness."

          The winner wrote:

          "Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

          (This guy has nailed it.)

          {"commentId":9853937,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"ladyd1951"}
          • 2 votes
          Reply#7 - Sat Oct 3, 2009 8:27 AM EDT
          {"commentId":10069833,"authorDomain":"craig-k-smith"}

          Actually, the hallmark of PC is instance on the use of a specialized vocabulary that presumes the desired conclusion. The GOP took over the mantle of PC in the 90's with the Gingrich version of "newspeak."

          Just goes to show what passes for education in Texas.

          {"commentId":10069833,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"craig-k-smith"}
          • 1 vote
          #7.1 - Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:56 PM EDT
          Reply
          {"commentId":9881049,"authorDomain":"mbgrandy"}

          Michael Moore should create a documentary entitled "The Life of a Hypocritical Anti-Establishmentarian, or How I Dupe the Public Out of Their Money to Enrich Myself in the Name of the Liberal Cause De Jour." What he always fails to admit is that our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and our economy (for all its faults) has enabled him to say what he wants, amass wealth, and continue to be an outspoken critic of the system that pays his bills and allows him to pretty much do whatever he wants without fear of reprisal (jail, or worse). Moore does not add to the discussion; he is one of the most divisive people out there, using his "celebrity" and notoriety to create fissures in our society. To listen to him, he's a committed Marxist; perhaps he should emigrate to Cuba or somewhere that embraces that model. I doubt, in his self-aggrandizing style, he would like it down there very much.

          {"commentId":9881049,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"mbgrandy"}
            Reply#8 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 10:48 AM EDT
            {"commentId":9884100,"authorDomain":"blueherring2006"}

            backlash of hypcorisy...suppose he will be looking for a bailout from our capitalist who pay taxes.

            {"commentId":9884100,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"blueherring2006"}
              Reply#9 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 1:14 PM EDT
              {"commentId":9954518,"authorDomain":null}

              I like the Dude, tends to keep people aware of what is going on behind closed doors.  Come on, its a film, enjoy, have popcorn and relax people. Please!

              {"commentId":9954518,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180"}
              • 2 votes
              Reply#10 - Thu Oct 8, 2009 9:07 PM EDT
              {"commentId":9996313,"authorDomain":"hampster4361"}

              He may not have  big following, but he always hits the mark with his films. America is a capitalistic nation, a nation where the dollar is worshiped.

              {"commentId":9996313,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"hampster4361"}
              • 1 vote
              Reply#11 - Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:29 AM EDT
              Reply
              {"commentId":10016568,"authorDomain":"carrotleaf"}

              Occam's Razor leads me to conclude that the number who came to see the movie directly correlated with the number of people who actually wanted to see it. Plus it's a documentary. There's no added value in seeing a documentary on the big screen compared to waiting till the DVD release, whereas it may be worth going to the theater so see explosions and CGI on the big screen with Dolby Digital Surround Sound.

              {"commentId":10016568,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"carrotleaf"}
                Reply#12 - Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:28 PM EDT
                {"commentId":10017282,"authorDomain":"JT-1400285"}

                And what mark is that? That the dollar is worshiped because of capitalism. Paleeeze. Currency is worshiped despite the form of government. In communist countries, the ruling class covets power and wealth borne of position and affiliation with the party. In socialist countries, the "ruling class" amasses the wealth of the nation. People are people, and despite the form of government, those in power will inevitably use that power to line their own pockets. If you want to do something about the corruption in America, forego jackasses like Michael Moore and get to the polls in 2010 and vote every incumbent, regardless of party, out of office. Limit their power by limiting their term. In every election for the next five years, insistently oust the status quo, and then hold the newcomers to their campaign promises. The fact that we have members of congress who have held power for 20 or more years is disgraceful. Use your vote to turn the tide - and that includes Obama if he doesn't produce what he promised during his term.

                {"commentId":10017282,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"JT-1400285"}
                  Reply#13 - Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:30 PM EDT
                  {"commentId":10191998,"authorDomain":"TheEpicofGilgamesh"}

                  JT-1400285:

                  Voting is the illusion of control and change allowed to the public. Voting machines are easily rigged and voters easily disenfranchised, manipulated, duped, or intimidated ...so unless you have enough money to monitor every single poll out there I suggest you develop a new means of cleaning house. People vote based on the information they're provided you better get to the printing press ...and quick!

                  Not everyone is corrupted by power to a degree that he/she hurts others as a result. Only certain types. Mainly the incompetent and self-doubting types. A recent study about power and corruption revealed such findings.

                  In any case, all politicians come from the same lot. Well, 99 percent of them do. Very rarely do you find anyone interested in doing things "straight down the line" void of religion, affiliation, or consequence. Until you have someone like that, nothing will ever get better. There's too much money to be made and too much control to be had while making it!

                  {"commentId":10191998,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"TheEpicofGilgamesh"}
                    #13.1 - Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:06 PM EDT
                    Reply
                    {"commentId":10070406,"authorDomain":"sir-quasar"}
                    The movie drew a round of applause when it ended

                    HA!!! I think that can be said about EVERY Micheal Moore movie...

                    {"commentId":10070406,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"sir-quasar"}
                    • 1 vote
                    Reply#14 - Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:48 AM EDT
                    {"commentId":10079823,"authorDomain":"donaldarc"}
                    Donald-452254Deleted
                    {"commentId":10171285,"authorDomain":"RobtAlan-296162"}

                    Perhaps, some people were depressed enough coping with the economic problems we are forced to endure and didn't have the strength to cope with the reality of their origin. The most dificult part of watching Michael Moore's films is he is so very close to the truth that he provokes people to seach themselves for the answers and unless they want to see what is really going on they are going to become defensive like a great many of the people who can only debunk the film maker. Why don't they attack the arguments that he makes instead? Our medical system doesn't work anymore, because it focuses on the business of medicine instead of the patient. The most important part of medicine is treating the patient and making him/her well. If it cannot do this, it must be changed. Denying people with pre-existing conditions is wrong. Dropping coverage when people get sick is wrong. Not wanting to make changes until 25% of Americans are uninsured is wrong. Everbody is going to have medical insurance now only, because the truth is the insurance companies became too greedy, that's all it is. Medicare works on a 3.5% mark-up and so can all other health care plans if they are forced to and finally they are going to be forced to. Sickness, pain and suffering are not a business and starting now that part of healthcare is officially out of business. And, for all the politicians that vote against a public option, Michael Moore is going to get rid of you too. Stupid people who don't get what Michael Moore is trying to tell you are going to be helped whether they get it or not. That is the beauty of a democracy. It finally gets things right.

                    {"commentId":10171285,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"RobtAlan-296162"}
                      Reply#16 - Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:00 PM EDT
                      Reply
                      {"commentId":10191841,"authorDomain":"TheEpicofGilgamesh"}

                      Moore is not dishonest or deceptive. He does not portray lies, just a side. However dramatic this 'side' is displayed is hardly an exaggeration, but I could also suppose that it's simply an extreme -yet still very real- example of a sample of humanity. Hey, it may not happen to us, or everyone, but it is happening. Not everyone suffered like Flint, MI. and plenty of people thought he was exaggerating the situation when he protested outright about the region and how it was being driven into the ground. Now look at Elkhart ... The new Flint, MI. with others right in line.

                      BUT!! Our discussion of the city may be giving it uber-celebrity status and generating millions of dollars for it. Hmm, maybe making money shouldn't be that easy for them to make money ... Shh! We better stop talking about the issue!

                      Moore is not a walking hypocrisy. He's not raking in millions upon millions to spend aimlessly or hoard, he's using that money to throw back into the industry and promote movie production in addition to making money to sustain himself. So what if he lives in a nice house, so would you given the money, and it's easy to accept money when you've earned it honestly. You also have to consider that he helps back his own endeavors and needs this constant cash flow in order to do so. It's like saying anyone who owns a business is a hypocrite because they utilize the system in the state it's in ...this is how things get done in America.

                      He's not hurting people; Not ripping anyone off, offering them chemicals for cash, misappropriating public tax monies or price gouging people out of their insurances, utilities, or homes and literally turning the well-off into paupers overnight and destroying entire families and towns. All which have been carried out in recent times for the sake of lining a few pockets and at the expense of literal millions of innocent, unsuspecting people.

                      Moore is the guy I wish I could be because he has plenty of important issues to highlight and making some cash permits him better access to mediums which reach the masses.


                      ...and who cares if he self-narrates??? That point is completely moot and simply subjective, rhetoric fluff. The point is that thousands of people now know a little bit more about every day life and the people out to take advantage of them. Is it ego-centric to know what sounds better between "take1" and "take2"? Is every narrator ego-centric? Is every producer, director, or executive d-bag ego-centric? No, they just know what they're doing well enough to hold that title.

                      BTW haters, criticism is cheap when alternatives are [still] lacking.

                      {"commentId":10191841,"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180","authorDomain":"TheEpicofGilgamesh"}
                        Reply#17 - Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:55 PM EDT
                        {"canLink":false,"threadId":"691375","isPrivate":false}
                        Leave a Comment:
                        You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                        As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                        {"threadId":"691375","contentId":"3342180"}
                        Start TrackingStart Tracking
                        Stop TrackingStop Tracking