So? When have you ever seen them actually use that to push theirn legislative agenda? Tech companies are far more active in using their status to push politics (e.g. SOPA protest).

Pushing their agenda: "You wouldn't download a car"?

Not covering other agendas: basically any news agency ever that only covers one side of a story (e.g. anti-gun-control news stations only reporting positive gun news, pro-gun-control stations only reporting negative gun news, no news stations reporting on anything outside the viewer-driving manufactured hot button issues). Another example, though this is an isolated case, there was a station in Nevada during the 2008 campaign season that only showed the polling numbers of their selected candidates, even though another candidate was polling higher than some of the ones they listed.

> Pushing their agenda: "You wouldn't download a car"?

I'm not sure I've ever seen one of these in a movie or DVD. I sure as hell saw the "kill SOPA" stuff Wikipedia, Google, etc, put up while I was trying to user their service for something else.

Maybe you're using an unlicensed DVD player (like most computer savvy users) that skips the previews and warnings and jumps straight to the movie. They're practically ubiquitous in the forced-viewing sections of DVDs and Blu-rays.

Actually, the MPAA have shoved their legislative agenda down the throats of moviegoers for many, many years now. Why do you think there are still people who make the mistake of calling copyright violations "theft" even after billions of bytes have been wasted on that semantic debate? Because a constant stream of propaganda has been devoted to drawing that connection in all of our minds.

What "constant stream of propaganda?" I've never seen a movie that tells me to think of copyright violation as "theft." Indeed, the standard "FBI copyright warning" at the beginning of movies calls it infringement.