[Imc] two-faced mass media

[Chas. M. Bee]

David Young wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 02:25:31PM -0500, Chas. M. Bee wrote:
> > Gotsch Tim wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all.  In case you haven't heard, the major media
> > > networks will not be airing footage of Osama bin Laden
> > > from the Al-Jazeera news service in Qatar.  This flies
> > > in the face of a story I ran across at
> > > http://news.excite.com/news/r/011012/05/television-aljazeera
> > >  I wonder how execs at mass media networks can live
> > > with themselves?
> >
> >    I think if I was in that unenviable position, I would have little
> > choice but to quiet my inner small, still voice with the assurances from
> > the feds that they have evidence of his past use of such statements to
> > transmit non-contextual data to his agents.
> 
>     What could evidence of past use possibly be?

   I've been waiting to hear that myself.  But I certainly couldn't
defend a different decision based on that - dead is dead.  Probably an
alignment of the statement date and subsequent action dates would make
me tend to err on the side of caution.  Other than that, couldn't guess.

>  What use could it be
>     to keep it secret?

   Not being involved in the investigation, I couldn't say.  Doesn't
matter, either - see above.
> 
> >    Given even the remote possibility of such a thing, I should think
> > that the ghosts of 5,000 innocent civilian dead might guide my hand.  -- CMB
> 
>     Yeah, I'll bet that the terrorists' plans are completely foiled,
>     now that they cannot communicate by TV broadcast. It's not like
>     there is any more certain means of communication.

   I assume you mean "isn't any more"..?  In any case, this is a straw
man argument, just like demonizing the media because they silence Bin
Laden's personal propaganda video clips (now there's a news source
fraught with useable information!) while leaving his spokespersons,
Taliban spokesmen, and ambassadors from the entire Muslim world on the
air is.
> 
>     The Air Force should shoot down birds flying from Afghanistan,
>     just in case they carry secret messages.

   Or anthrax!  Aieee!!  =)  In any case, they have no value as a
no-time-lag means of simultaneous activation.

   As a side note - does this hostility come from my having responded to
the question, or the likelihood of my answer?  (Or other?)  I've noticed
that some fringe folk get very irate when their enemies are portrayed as
otherwise-compassionate human beings in an ethical bind.

   I'll leave out my lengthy treatise on how this attitude affects
believability and persuasive results out in the community.

   Oh yeah - please direct any further replies to my personal e-mail
addy.  -- CMB