Richard Dawkins' Documentary Tactics

As a comment to my previous post on the false accusations of dishonesty regarding the film Expelled, one commenter had this to say:

They could have done what Dawkins did for his "Root of All Evil" series, which was to cherry-pick opponents who only had weak arguments, thereby making himself look smarter. Instead, they went straight to the leaders of the opposition, who only had...

Oops. Never mind.

Which is more dishonest: Accurately telling people the subject matter of a documentary, but not disclosing the editorial angle, or misrepresenting the best arguments for a position by only presenting the weakest advocates?