It most certainly was dishonest insofar as it presented factual aviation information. Even if I agree it was presented within a legitimate comedic framework, I think it was irresponsible.
Example: The use of the word “loophole”, as a way of allowing Fielder to fly at 737 struck me as very disingenuous. He did NOT become an airline pilot. Fielder supposedly got his private, instrument commercial and multi-engine licenses. He then took sim training for a 737 type rating (see below). That’s all perfectly legit, but is an extremely uncommon way for a pilot career to progress. He then (apparently, supposedly) flew the plane with another rated pilot, probably under Part 91, which does not govern airline operations in the United States.
He essentially flew a private flight, which was allowed by his licenses and training. I don’t think that’s well described as a “loophole”. Pilots ferry big planes like that all the time, and while it’s much more common for those people to be employed by an airline (and subject to Part 121 rules, which are more strict), that’s a thing that happens.
They did point out that he has fewer than 1500 hours, which means Fielder cannot be employed by a U.S. airline even if he wanted to. So again, I don’t know what safety problems he thinks he was pointing out.
But again, maybe this misses the point. I can see the comedic premise of going to great lengths, moving mountains, to set up unlikely situations. But I think the way this blurred with the documentary style is a little irresponsible. Seems like it’s telling people all kinds of cowboy nonsense is going on with big jets, which really is not true.
Whatever - I don’t get it. Not really funny in the aggregate.
(About the sim training: Fielder made it sound like it’s crazy to go from the sim to flying the real jet. That’s the way it’s been done for decades, but it omits the context that in airline operations you’re doing this with a qualified training captain whose job is specifically to transition new pilots to real world operations.)