U.S. Media

[salr15]

My point sally is how conditioned we ALL are to deaths we hear about on a continual basis, like fatalities from car crashes. Every day on the news: x more dead in Iraq, y dead in car crash. Yes the media reports it, but unless we're personally involved, it holds less meaning for us and is soon forgotten. And that goes for you as well, so your "holier than thou" humanitarian crusade is total BS. What about the tragic state of affairs in Darfur? Why haven't you been championing their cause? Probably because you're unaware, and just looking for an excuse to argue, and the Iraqi bombing was something convenient to argue about.
And BTW, you can't claim a drunk driver killing people is an accident, which is why no one in the traffic safety field will call a crash an accident.

Somehow I think you are starting basically say exactly what I am saying. My point is exactly that, why haven't we heard about it?? Isn't that the Media's role to inform us of these events?

I am kind of lost what you are exactly arguing. I agree with you that VT was a tragedy, I am just saying the US media sucks and used the Iraqi bombing as an example.

And in regards to your "drunk driving" you never stated drunk driving, you said car crashes in general. Drunk driving is tragic, but again I don't compare scattered driving accidents over a period of time to one event that takes 150 peoples lives. I am sure if there is a drunk driver that went on a rampage and kille 40 people, it would be all over the news.

[Guilty_Biscuit]

The media reports what sells. Pure and simple. It has no concience, it produces stories that people want to read.

It is a reflection on our societies that some stories get so much coverage while others get none.

This is a story from a while ago where a Police Chief in Britain questioned the way the media selects it's stories in pretty much the same way as salr is questioning it now. At the time he got ripped to shreads.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4651368.stm

It isn't being insensitive to question the time the media gives to these stories it is asking a valid question, that reflects on our society and that needs to be debated by society in general as it throws up some nasty conclusions about ourselves and our neighbours.

Love to all those who lost their lives in Iraq and all those who lost theirs in the VT tragedy. I hope those left behind find peace. And here's more love for all those who died in tragedies that haven't been reported because their skin isn't the right colour.

[wicked]

Foolish, you were saying the Iraqi bombings should be just as local as the VT tragedy? That was the point I was disagreeing with. If there was another point in there, it didn't make it out.

And unless US soldiers actually set that bomb, or died in that bombing, it's not as directly related as VT. I'm sure someone will claim the US (and others) presence there is the indirect reason for that bombing, I won't debate either way on that.

[Alexwales93]

The news chooses to report more on events that happen in there country than anywhere else, because things that might happen here may affect people here.
I'm not saying that the Iraqi bombings are not as important, but the news, as it has been said throughout this read, show what they think is important to their people.
Also, the news stays on for an average of 30 mins in one program, they can not do an in-depth report on every story. It's just the way it is.

I cannot, however, say how bad the coverage is over in America, because I am Welsh, and live in Britian.

There has been a lot of coverage over the V.T tragedy on the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Five....
The papers have also reported on it, but they also have reports on the goings on elsewhere.

[wicked]

The news chooses to report more on events that happen in there country than anywhere else, because things that might happen here may affect people here.
I'm not saying that the Iraqi bombings are not as important, but the news, as it has been said throughout this read, show what they think is important to their people.
Also, the news stays on for an average of 30 mins in one program, they can not do an in-depth report on every story. It's just the way it is.

What he said.

[salr15]

The news chooses to report more on events that happen in there country than anywhere else, because things that might happen here may affect people here.
I'm not saying that the Iraqi bombings are not as important, but the news, as it has been said throughout this read, show what they think is important to their people.
Also, the news stays on for an average of 30 mins in one program, they can not do an in-depth report on every story. It's just the way it is.

I cannot, however, say how bad the coverage is over in America, because I am Welsh, and live in Britian.

There has been a lot of coverage over the V.T tragedy on the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Five....
The papers have also reported on it, but they also have reports on the goings on elsewhere.

I see wicked you conveniently excluded the end of his comments. Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain. Clearly their media is better.

[foolish_yeti]

Foolish, you were saying the Iraqi bombings should be just as local as the VT tragedy? That was the point I was disagreeing with. If there was another point in there, it didn't make it out.

First- thank you for asking for clarification. It's much more helpful to have a conversation without personal attacks. Local as in relating to our lives. People take geographically local events much more personal that happen overseas- which is unavoidable. Thus what we should be doing- need to be doing- is making a more conscious effort. I think about how horrible I feel when I hear about school shootings- from my personal connections to Dawson, from my indirect connection as an educator, from my indirect connection as a student, from my connection as a human being. Then I think about what role our culture is having on creating that very same effect on others. The media should be an excellent tool in this. It's not that people shouldn't think about local events- it's that we need to make a conscious effort not to just think about local events.

And unless US soldiers actually set that bomb, or died in that bombing, it's not as directly related as VT. I'm sure someone will claim the US (and others) presence there is the indirect reason for that bombing, I won't debate either way on that.

I never mentioned Iraq bombings- but I'll comment. First you obviously have bombings by the States- which by have by far outweighed those perpetrated against them. Those are obviously directly related. But indirect relation is just as important. Why are these people so bent against destroying the west? We should be perhaps examining our own actions and our own history. The media portrays these people as crazy, misguided people killing the innocent- and to a certain extent they do kill innocent people, but what is our role in all of this? How many innocent people do we kill (and not even directly through warfare)...how are our actions causing others to take such action against us?

While it is especially difficult to discuss these issues right after tragic events such as VT- it's also a very crucial time to be discussing them.

[wicked]

Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain.

Really? VT is a school with international students and faculty. At least one of the professors killed was British. The entire world is watching... and thinking about the security on their own campuses.

[wicked]

It's not that people shouldn't think about local events- it's that we need to make a conscious effort not to just think about local events.

Agreed.

[salr15]

Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain.

Really? VT is a school with international students and faculty. At least one of the professors killed was British. The entire world is watching... and thinking about the security on their own campuses.

Wait, so you are saying VT is local news in Bratain? So the only reason they are showing it is because a British professor was killed??? So if there were no British people in the attack, they wouldn't show it?

I would recommend you watch BBC news for a little bit and then make false accusations.

[foolish_yeti]

It's not that people shouldn't think about local events- it's that we need to make a conscious effort not to just think about local events.

Agreed.

And that should be a major role of the media. We don't need help to think about VT. It's on everyone's minds, on everyone's lips. Again, not saying it should not be covered by the media.

Wait, so you are saying VT is local news in Bratain? So the only reason they are showing it is because a British professor was killed??? So if there were no British people in the attack, they wouldn't show it?

Anything that happens in a Western country is automatically seen as possible in every other western country. It makes for great news (media is about making money) because people immediately identify with it.

[Guilty_Biscuit]

Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain. Clearly their media is better.

You'd think so salr but as the '51st state' we get far too much American news. Maybe British reporters are just too lazy to get their own stories or maybe not much happens over here, I just don't know.

[salr15]

It's not that people shouldn't think about local events- it's that we need to make a conscious effort not to just think about local events.

Agreed.

And that should be a major role of the media. We don't need help to think about VT. It's on everyone's minds, on everyone's lips. Again, not saying it should not be covered by the media.

Wait, so you are saying VT is local news in Bratain? So the only reason they are showing it is because a British professor was killed??? So if there were no British people in the attack, they wouldn't show it?

Anything that happens in a Western country is automatically seen as possible in every other western country. It makes for great news (media is about making money) because people immediately identify with it.

I agree with you foolish, the reason I used VT is because it basically brought this whole issue up for me. I mean I always thought the media sucked but then just seeing all the things going on in the media the past few days made me think.

I think Wicked took it as a personal attack on VT which is not what it was meant to be.

[Alexwales93]

Well I personally am glad that tradegy's do NOT occur over here, so the media can report them.
Looking back, I also remember the horrible bombings in London, the worst single attack in Britian in years. This news took over the media over here, as has V.T tragedy, because it's local news, and the news belives the people care more about happenings in their own countries.

[salr15]

I agree with you foolish

Btw, if that's not an oxymoron...I don't know what is.

[foolish_yeti]

I agree with you foolish

Btw, if that's not an oxymoron...I don't know what is.

The foolish part of my name is a literary reference- the type character of the fool. For example in Shakespeare- King Lear as an example- the jester (conveniently and blatantly named the Fool).

[Guilty_Biscuit]

Well I personally am glad that tradegy's do NOT occur over here, so the media can report them.
Looking back, I also remember the horrible bombings in London, the worst single attack in Britian in years. This news took over the media over here, as has V.T tragedy, because it's local news, and the news belives the people care more about happenings in their own countries.

Local news that should presumably take precedence over VT on your TV screen then:

Welsh News

Man admits brothel hammer deaths
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/6567989.stm

Dying woman accused her boyfriend
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/6564849.stm

Man arrested over Penarth murder
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6568519.stm

Man in court over wife's murder
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6561971.stm

Infected blood killed cancer man
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/6564043.stm

Mother in court over man's death
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6551123.stm

[wicked]

Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain.

Really? VT is a school with international students and faculty. At least one of the professors killed was British. The entire world is watching... and thinking about the security on their own campuses.

Wait, so you are saying VT is local news in Bratain? So the only reason they are showing it is because a British professor was killed??? So if there were no British people in the attack, they wouldn't show it?

I would recommend you watch BBC news for a little bit and then make false accusations.

Now it's obvious you're arguing just to argue. I said none of that. I'm done talking with someone who has no reading comprehension skills.

[2dimes]

Do Texada Island next.

[salr15]

Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain.

Really? VT is a school with international students and faculty. At least one of the professors killed was British. The entire world is watching... and thinking about the security on their own campuses.

Wait, so you are saying VT is local news in Bratain? So the only reason they are showing it is because a British professor was killed??? So if there were no British people in the attack, they wouldn't show it?

I would recommend you watch BBC news for a little bit and then make false accusations.

Now it's obvious you're arguing just to argue. I said none of that. I'm done talking with someone who has no reading comprehension skills.

I think you are just done talking (or going in circles) which is a good thing.

[foolish_yeti]

Last time I checked, VT wasn't local news in Britain.

Really? VT is a school with international students and faculty. At least one of the professors killed was British. The entire world is watching... and thinking about the security on their own campuses.

Wait, so you are saying VT is local news in Bratain? So the only reason they are showing it is because a British professor was killed??? So if there were no British people in the attack, they wouldn't show it?

I would recommend you watch BBC news for a little bit and then make false accusations.

Now it's obvious you're arguing just to argue. I said none of that. I'm done talking with someone who has no reading comprehension skills.

I think you are just done talking (or going in circles) which is a good thing.

Sarl, a more appropriate response would be to show how she is doing what you are accusing her of. In my opinion she didn't.

[MeDeFe]

In my opinion all of you need to make a fresh start.

[salr15]

Well I am confused what she is aguing about and why she is so hostile about it. First she says that the bombings in Iraq are equavalent to car crashes and if you are going to feel sorry for Iraqi bomb victims you have to feel sorry for any person that has ever died in a car crash.

Then when I point out that you can't compare bombings to accidents, she says she was talking about drunk driving accidents. I still don't see the relationship between a bombing and drunk driving. When was the last time you saw a 150 people die in a drunk driving accident?

Then she took out a piece of what Alexwales said and agreed with him that the news will show what it believes the local people want to see. When I pointed out that he also stated he doesn't know anything about the US news coverage and that they have been showing the VT tragedy in Britain, she says that the VT tragedy is a local event in Britain (this is my understanding of what she said by basically disagreeing with me).

So after all this, she comes to the conclusion that I have a problem with reading comprehension and that I am just arguing for the sake of arguing, which sounds a little contradictory to me.

[salr15]

In my opinion all of you need to make a fresh start.

I personally am not mad at anyone, this is just a discussion. I don't mind if people disagree with me...there is always two side to a story. But I think wicked has an issue with someone not agreeing with what she says and if they disagree they have problems reading and are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[wicked]

Perhaps sally b/c you're drawing incorrect conclusions to every single thing I've written. Either you really are dumb, you're too young to comprehend, or you're arguing just to argue, or all of the above. Whichever it is, you're impossible to carry on a conversation with b/c of the reasons stated above. I'm not mad or angry, just have no further interest in talking to you.