5 edits
The u.s. media constantly refers with emotion and emphasis to american casualties.
Occasionally and casually it is mentioned that the largest number of deaths is taken overwhelmingly taken by the iraqis - and largely civilian casualties too it would seem.
The result of this one sided reporting is that many watchers of this media come to believe that u.s. people's deaths are more important than iraqi people's deaths. At the extreme the iraqi people are no longer deemed as valuable humans at all.
These media-watchers include everyone from housewife or private to secretary of defence and also president.
Many of these people can then be expected to act in accordance with these beliefs.
p.s. this of course could happen in any country. It is not intended as u.s. bashing; (it is also happening in australia but this is less interesting to most of the world's population) it is intended as media bashing - presuming it is true.
If this process is acting then we should turn to the cause of the process and try to cut the process off, so that the media has more genuine need for objectivity.
Originally posted by flexmoreThe media should be objective. But a quick glance at who owns what, will I'm sure, point out why what media says what about who and why.
The u.s. media constantly refers with emotion and emphasis to american casualties.
Occasionally and casually it is mentioned that the largest number of deaths is taken overwhelmingly taken by the iraqis - and largely civilian casualties too it would seem.
The result of this one sided reporting is that many watchers of this media come to believe that u ...[text shortened]... and try to cut the process off, so that the media has more genuine need for objectivity.
That must be one of the worst sentences I've ever written!
I know various media sources (newspapers) have been told that they have to report things from certain angles.
The BBC just had a hammering because of stating that Blair had 'spiced up' the Iraq dossier. It goes to a hearing, presided over by Hutton, the very objective and reliable chap who also stated the British forces were not at fault during Bloody Sunday in the 70's.
Hutton comes down on the side of Blair, whilst everyone in the whole wide world knows that half the dossier was downloaded from the internet, a thesis more than 10 years old...
The problem is that if you constantly (have to) question your sources of information you eventually end up having paranoid tendencies.
The BBC and the Hutton inquiry are the perfect example. The government is telling you x. The Hutton report is telling you x. The Rupert Murdoch press is telling you x.
Every source which states that it is actually y is constantly trashed by the government and the rest of the media, then when push comes to shove, it all ends up being y anyway.
Which once again proves that even if you are paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirYou talk of conspiracies - i have heard such theories before - i know little of their truth or mistruth.
The media should be objective. But a quick glance at who owns what, will I'm sure, point out why what media says what about who and why.
That must be one of the worst sentences I've ever written!
I know various media sources ...[text shortened]... if you are paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
BUT they are not necessary:
There can be a natural progression:
The television stations and newspapers produce material to sell their product - this must be sensational news.
Deaths of citizens of the country of audience is sensational and will sell papers and attract viewers to the evening news.
(a smaller and less devious version of the extravagent:
Tomorrow Never Dies
Running Time 123 minutes
James Bond Pierce Brosnan
Plot
British multimedia mogul Elliot Carver plans to achieve global domination by influencing the minds of people over the entire globe through his media empire, which after his plan to start a war between Britain and China, will enable him to have more people under his influence than anyone else has achieved in the history of the planet.
)
Originally posted by flexmorePlot- Good guys against Isalamofacists. Good guys don't want to be there. Don't want to die.
The u.s. media constantly refers with emotion and emphasis to american casualties.
Occasionally and casually it is mentioned that the largest number of deaths is taken overwhelmingly taken by the iraqis - and largely civilian casualties too it would seem.
The result of this one sided reporting is that many watchers of this media come to believe that u ...[text shortened]... and try to cut the process off, so that the media has more genuine need for objectivity.
Islamofacists are a cult of death. More death the better.
Which is news? The death of brave people trying to bring about democracy? Or the death of Islamofacists who WANT TO DIE?
The real sad story... as it always is in war are in the innocents who get caught between the warring parties. War is hell. For sure if you are an innocent... dead... civillian.
Makes you wish that these "innocents" would learn to give a crap about allowing facists and dictators to take control of their lazy existences. But lazy and stupid will always aver totalitarian fools.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyAre you just trying to get a reaction or do you actually hold these opinions?
What is appalling? Their allowing Dictators and Facists to take over their countries? Or the death and war that their laziness causes in the end?
I am not going to try to address what is appalling about them; to me these views about the situation in Iraq are skewed and lunatic.
Originally posted by CaptainDangerousI am quite serious, as any number of people will tell you. People are responsible for their actions and their lack of action when action is required.
Are you just trying to get a reaction or do you actually hold these opinions?
I am not going to try to address what is appalling about them; to me these views about the situation in Iraq are skewed and lunatic.
The people of Iraq, through laziness... allowed communists (Batthists) to take over their country. They are "reaping the whirlwind" as it were.
Are you saying that thinking, able humans are NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR allowing commies to take over their lives?
