Question: Q: Back in Time Documentary Looks at History of Back to the Future : People.com

09/15/2015 AT 01:05 AM EDT

timeless would not only be a cliche; it would be bad wordplay. However, the 1985 film has endured three decades better than most '80s blockbusters have. Now, fans can get an insider's peek into the making of the film with

, a new documentary about the time-travel classic.

Among the surprising bits revealed in just the trailer is a story from series star

about sitting next to Princess Diana at the film's premiere.

"I realize that the seat next to me is empty. And it dawns on me that Princess Diana is going to be sitting next to me," Fox explains in an interview. "The movie starts and it occurs to me that I'm a fake yawn and an arm stretch away from being on a date with the Princess of Wales."

It's enough to make you wonder what kind of alternate future might have been if Fox had only made that move back in the day.

The trailer for the documentary premiered online on Monday, the same day that news broke that Fox and

for a new video game,

will open in select theaters on

diehards will no doubt recognize as the one that Fox's character arrives at when he travels forward in time in
What are the most important parts of this text?

A: Watch the trailer for a new documentary about the making of the 1985 time travel classic


Q: Foreign Car Factories Curb Output in China

SHANGHAI—China’s foreign-car factories, once among the world’s busiest, are starting to slack off.

New weakness in the world’s largest car market has led companies such as General Motors Co. and Volkswagen AG to run their plants there at less than full capacity for the first time, according to industry data.

The global auto makers, which have been some of the biggest beneficiaries of Chinese consumers’ increasing appetite for...
What are the most important parts of this text?

A: New weakness in China has led auto makers such as General Motors Co. and Volkswagen AG to run their plants there at less than full capacity for the first time.


Q: Fox News inflames Obamacare debate

Fox News is busy promoting a clash Wednesday between its White House correspondent Ed Henry and White House press secretary Jay Carney over Obamacare. The exchange boiled down to a classic Washington gotcha question: Will you, Mr. Washington Politics Guy, take the very medicine you’re prescribing? In that spirit, Henry asked Carney whether he would enroll in Obamacare. (Transcript below).

To abridge Carney’s response: Sure, he would enroll if, “in a future life,” he somehow ended up deprived of employer-provided health care. But since he has coverage through his employer — the federal government — he’s okay for now. According to the Obamacare facts site: “The fact is ObamaCare does not replace private insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid. If you have health coverage you like, you can keep it.”

By posing this question in a White House briefing, Henry gives the impression to anyone who watches — Fox News viewers, that is — that Carney’s enrollment in an Obamacare exchange is something that the government intended to happen. In fact, it didn’t: Obamacare has always foreseen that those covered by existing employer-based plans would remain so. As Jeffrey Young has explained in the Huffington Post:

For nearly everyone else — the 170.9 million people covered by employers and the 101.5 million enrolled in government health programs — the ballyhooed launch of the Obamacare exchanges will mean little, according to health care, consumer and business experts.

Pressing Carney on whether he and his colleagues would enroll in Obamacare, thus, constitutes an effort to inflame, not to inform, the public about what’s actually going on. It’s one of those instances where a media outlet drops poor and misleading notions into the public conversation and will later make much hay of the inevitable poll results showing how confused people are about the law.

For context, consider that Fox News chief Roger Ailes has little regard for Obamacare.

Q: So let’s take the stats from the Wall Street Journal out and let’s take the attacks from Republicans out. You’re talking about enrollment. Will Jay Carney enroll in this? Will White House staff enroll in Obamacare?

JAY CARNEY: Again, everybody — you, if you have –

Q: Let’s start with you. Are you going to enroll?

CARNEY: If I, in a future life, don’t have employer –

Q: Well, you said the premiums are so great –

CARNEY: Ed — does everybody here agree that we can ask questions and answer them, but if you want to — you’re not even letting me answer the question, Ed.

Q: Please, go ahead and answer.

CARNEY: I mean, I’m not quite sure what –

Q: It’s a simple question.

Q: Okay. So you are going to enroll?

CARNEY: If I did not — Ed, if I did not have employer-provided health insurance — like I’m sure you do, unless there’s something about Fox I don’t know — then I would absolutely enroll. And it would be more affordable because of it. And I think you’ll see that around the country.

But the whole purpose — again, a fact often either ignored or mischaracterized by critics — is that if you have insurance provided by your employer that you like, nothing changes for you. But if you change jobs, or if you get laid off, and you then take a job — you start your own business or you take a job where you’re not given insurance by your employer, you will now have — or once the marketplaces are in effect — options that were never available before, at affordable prices. And that’s the point.

And the irony of this argument that Republicans are making is that pretty soon they’re going to be making an argument that what they desperately want to do, without an alternative, is take benefits away from the American people — benefits that help them live better lives and healthier lives.
What are the most important parts of this text?

A:
Answer: Why on earth wouldn't Jay Carney be enrolling in Obamacare, if it's really so great? Turns out there's a reason why.