Documentary Deathmatch.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was followed (and preceded!) by a hailstorm of
accusations from conservative columnists and critics that it was
full of misrepresentations and deceptions. Michael Moore has
threatened the possibility of legal action against attackers of
his movie: "Any attempts to libel me will be met by force," he
said to the

New York Times on June 20.

Jack Shafer criticizes
him for threatening libel suits. I think he is largely correct.
Unless someone publishes an outright claim that Moore is a liar and
specifically identifies the lie he allegedly made, lawsuits are
inappropriate. A better way to have this battle is in the arena
of public opinion.

What i want to see is a documentary deathmatch between
Moore and, say, O'Reilly: each of them gets to put together
whatever they want for half the time of a combined documentary,
like a debate with the ultimate in audiovisual aids.
They get to put together whatever evidence they want to prove
the other one has been lying or defend themselves from attacks.
The time could be split up into alternating segments like
5 minutes of Moore, 5 minutes of O'Reilly, 25 and 25, 25 and 25,
and 5 and 5 to close off, for example. A third-party organization
could accept the segments and send them back and forth so each
side could reply to the preceding segment if it wished.

The result would be a lot of fun, amazing to watch, and i bet it
would have an even bigger opening weekend than Fahrenheit 9/11,
because fans of both Moore and O'Reilly would show up hoping to see
the other one proved a fool. Everybody wins.