Originally posted by Jerico
If you went back to any other war you would see countless atrocities, a thousand times worse than this current outrage in Falujah, its only due to the mass hysteria of the American media that something like this has been blown into an event.Televising such a thing and making the massive spectacle of it that they has will lead to many more deaths of American soldiers. Your media is the the one that is guilty of murder.
If you are saying that we should do away with the media, then people would get away with murder a lot more often than they actually do now. No one would know about it and then we'd all be ignorant. I can agree that the media may affect certain situations, i.e. Jeraldo Rivera blowing U.S. military stragety to the proposed enemy at that time, but I think the media is important. The average reporter and cameraman want to be as unbiased as possible. They are there to record information as a 'fly on the wall', so to speak, and to give the general public insight. People can turn off their televisions if they chose to. I am a news cameraman for a Salinas NBC Affiliate in California. I know more about the gang crisis in my backyard first hand, which is as good a war as any, than I do about this war. To an extent, I think you are right about the 'spectacle' aspect that the media may help induce, but to say that the media is guilty of murder, I think is incorrect. I'm not accusing you of saying that we should do away with the media, but if that is your standpoint, I think you are wrong. The media will do their job regardless, it is censorship that may be the enemy you speak of. Believe me, I shoot all kinds of stuff that is too graphic and would be illegal for me to air on television. As far as I'm concerned, me, my news director, my reporter, we would love to show it all 'as is', but there's a little group called the FCC that won't let us. They are controlled by the Federal Government of the United States of America. They are the ones who sifen the information gathered by the media. The video of the U.S. soldier killing an innocent person is what it is, the reaction of 'the people' is not the media's fault. As I said earlier in this thread, it's a war. F*cked up sh*t happens. That is why war sucks.
Originally posted by The Tired Hiker
If you are saying that we should do away with the media, then people would get away with murder a lot more often than they actually do now.
The "embedded journalist" idea has gone a long way towards removing media impartiality (and thus good unbiased journalism).
Not that we get much in the way of unbiased reporting these days - but I agree, at least the media forces a government to put a spin on events, rather than hiding them entirely.
Originally posted by Mr Zero
The "embedded journalist" idea has gone a long way towards removing media impartiality (and thus good unbiased journalism).Not that we get much in the way of unbiased reporting these days - but I agree, at least the media forces a government to put a spin on events, rather than hiding them entirely.
In some cases, I'd agree.
If you watch Iraqi media, you'll get their perspective on things. If you watch US media, you'll get their perspective on things. Everything we do is governed by our own perceptions. The media therefore is not necessarily biased, it's just giving you a pretty subjective take on events, dictated by their frames-of-reference. The old debate on "are you a freedom fighter or a terrorist" illustrates this.
The way I see it, when 911 happened, it was the sort of thing I knew deep down was going to happen. USA's involvement in other countries affairs has gone overboard. I still can't be convinced that all this war is over freeing people and supporting democracy. I can believe, however, that it all has to do with the business of our president. Right now, his business is oil.
Originally posted by moneypenny
If you watch Iraqi media, you'll get their perspective on things. If you watch US media, you'll get their perspective on things. Everything we do is governed by our own perceptions. The media therefore is not necessarily biased, it's just giving you a pretty subjective take on events, dictated by their frames-of-reference. The old debate on "are you a freedom fighter or a terrorist" illustrates this.
I think floating robotic cameras with no company logo, minus a reporter, would be the best way to get unbiased media coverage.
Originally posted by moneypenny
Exactly! That's what I'm thinking. The Bush administration is making alot of money out of this war.
Yes, and if you buy gas for your car, ride a bus, fly in a plane, etc., then you support the war if you like it or not. I am all for solar powered vehicles, or making it illegal to work more than a bike ride from where you live.
That's a good idea actually. CCTv cameras. With no commentary from a reporter. That way we can be allowed to make up our own minds about things. The problem with that is it might not always be contextualised. For example, the CCTV camera shows me pepper-spraying the hell out of some guy. Everyone thinks: "What a cow. Look what she's doing to that guy. She's wrong". Out of context (not having the previous frame or whatever) I'm wrong. However, if you show the first bit you see pepper-sprayee stealing my hand bag. Editing will still mislead the public, regardless of the absence of name tags. And let's face it, showing everything doesn't make for exciting watching.
Originally posted by Mr Zero
While I agree that the reasons for fighting this war are far from clear-cut and should be discussed: It's off topic for this thread.
I don't. I think that if you are present here at this moment and want to discuss issues or ideas rooted to this thread's title, then it's perfectly fine until some mod merges it or bans someone. 😬