Michael Moore, love him or hate him, stepped too far when he doctored a headline for use in “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

The (Bloomington) Pantagraph sent Moore and the film’s production company a letter seeking an apology and $1 in damages.

The paper said a small headline over a letter to the editor was cast in the film as the prominent front-page headline “Latest Florida recount shows Gore won election.”

Why jeopardize his credibility for such a minor detail? Moore should have known people were going to scrutinize his film for any inconsistency, especially after “Bowling for Columbine” was pored over and found to contain falsities.

Moore went so far as to list what he calls line-by-line attribution to the assertions in “Fahrenheit 9/11” on his Web site, www.michaelmoore.com.

People understand the election was contested. They know the controversy following the 2000 election. Moore did not need to doctor a front page to get his point across.

Misrepresenting a headline may not seem like a big deal, but the Pantagraph, like all newspapers, has only its credibility with readers upon which to rely.

Plastering the headline under the paper’s banner gives viewers an inaccurate impression of the paper’s editorial work.

Masochistic conservative readers – or potential readers – of the paper who saw the film probably would have formed a different opinion of the publication after viewing the graphic.

Moore should learn by now that he needs his credibility just as much as newspapers do, and the damage done to his reputation – albeit trivial – was not worth a brief and inconsequential graphic.