I've only seen the trailer. The movie won't open until next Friday. But from what I've seen I can tell you Death of a President is as tasteless as it is obscene. It's styled as an "investigative documentary." Mixing real news footage with dramatized segments, it depicts a fictional 2007 assassination of President Bush.

I'm a libertarian when it comes to what people can see or hear but this film tests my libertarian principles. This is exploitive trash. To release it just days before a mid-term election is shameless.

A civilized society sets some limits on what can be sold in the market. It's illegal to sell babies or body parts, narcotics, prostitution, or hard-core pornography. Why should it be legal to sell a movie about assassinating a sitting president?

Yet we're a democracy, and I don't like the idea of banning any form of speech, no matter how sick and warped it may be. This film doesn't try to make a political point, but suppose it did? Suppose a film portrayed scenes of political violence as a means of conveying a political message? Once we start banning this kind of thing we're on a slippery slope to Big Brother. I don't want government deciding what kind of speech should be banned on the basis of its content.

So my reluctant conclusion is that -- as long as it doesn't incite violence -- the film should be allowed to be released.

But that doesn't mean we have to watch it. In fact, we ought to teach the producers and movie houses a lesson they won't forget. Let's show them shameful sensationalism like this doesn't sell.

Here's my strong recommendation: Don't pay good money to see this movie.

Robert B. Reich is co-founder of The American Prospect. A version of this column originally appeared on Marketplace.

* * *

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to The American Prospect here.

Support independent media with a tax-deductible donation here.