Muslim scholars refute recent violence. - Page 2

Quicksilver · #11 10-06-2006, 12:01 PM

Yep. I have even heard other major news reporters complain about the same issue. It appears that major corperations like Disney ect are in control of what gets reported and a lot of real truth is left out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

If you read the BBC or other major European news sources regularly, you will see more stories like this one. American newspapers only seem to report what the radical Islamic extremists have to say.

Sponsored Links

B-Line · #12 10-06-2006, 03:15 PM

Wait a minute, hold on, back up....

First, I am non partisan. I am neither liberal nor conservative. I am not pro war in Iraq even though I am very much a Zionist. I am a native New Yorker, a Jew, and a resonably minded person with a degree in Journalism.

I am not a journalist though, that whole industry makes me sick. It's worse than politics.

Having said that, lets talk about the news for a minute. There are two types of news stories, 1) an event 2) a pseudo event (an event designed with the sole reason to be news.)
- Radical Muslims killing a nun, burning down churches, rioting over cartoons and killing people is an event, captured by the media.

- Muslim writers and intellectuals being critical of the way Muslims have responded is a PSEUDO EVENT. It is a statement being made with the sole purpose of being news.

And, since events like, war, natural disasters, terrorist attacks, actually effect our daily lives much more so than a Pseudo Event or "press conference" -- The event will always be bigger news, especially because it has a bigger impact on our lives.

Now yes, some of you may argue that war, terrorist attacks, even the killing of a nun was done for sole purpose of making news and thus should be considered a Pseudo Event, I can not say you are entirely wrong. But reporters can not spend their lives seeking out statements from moderates when people are off killing.

Eric5273 · #13 10-06-2006, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-Line

Wait a minute, hold on, back up....

First, I am non partisan. I am neither liberal nor conservative. I am not pro war in Iraq even though I am very much a Zionist. I am a native New Yorker, a Jew, and a resonably minded person with a degree in Journalism.

I am not a journalist though, that whole industry makes me sick. It's worse than politics.

Having said that, lets talk about the news for a minute. There are two types of news stories, 1) an event 2) a pseudo event (an event designed with the sole reason to be news.)
- Radical Muslims killing a nun, burning down churches, rioting over cartoons and killing people is an event, captured by the media.

- Muslim writers and intellectuals being critical of the way Muslims have responded is a PSEUDO EVENT. It is a statement being made with the sole purpose of being news.

And, since events like, war, natural disasters, terrorist attacks, actually effect our daily lives much more so than a Pseudo Event or "press conference" -- The event will always be bigger news, especially because it has a bigger impact on our lives.

Now yes, some of you may argue that war, terrorist attacks, even the killing of a nun was done for sole purpose of making news and thus should be considered a Pseudo Event, I can not say you are entirely wrong. But reporters can not spend their lives seeking out statements from moderates when people are off killing.

All good points. But even actually "events" are often times not reported on. As a Zionist, I'm sure you can appreciate the following:

1) Al-Jazeera will always report when Israelis kill Palestineans, but often times do not report when Palestineans kill Israelis.

2) The American media always reports when Palestineans kill Israelis, but only sometimes report when Israelis kill Palestineans.

I call this "selective" reporting. Rarely does any media source actually report news that is flat out false. "Bias" in news media comes from which news they report and which they do not.

blondboinsd · #14 10-06-2006, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6to

Or maybe it's because in the end only the "spicy" news sells... even for the "liberal" media....

That would convervative NOT Liberal media

Eric5273 · #15 10-06-2006, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondboinsd

That would convervative NOT Liberal media

No, that would be all media that has advertisers. The only media that does not care about their circulation numbers are publicly owned stations like the BBC, PBS, NPR, etc.

rayxi · #16 10-06-2006, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

All good points. But even actually "events" are often times not reported on. As a Zionist, I'm sure you can appreciate the following:

1) Al-Jazeera will always report when Israelis kill Palestineans, but often times do not report when Palestineans kill Israelis.

2) The American media always reports when Palestineans kill Israelis, but only sometimes report when Israelis kill Palestineans.

I call this "selective" reporting. Rarely does any media source actually report news that is flat out false. "Bias" in news media comes from which news they report and which they do not.

And the tens of thousands of people that were killed in Darfur and Rowanda didn't get the press coverage of a single days conflict in the Middle East.

Eric5273 · #17 10-06-2006, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rayxi

And the tens of thousands of people that were killed in Darfur and Rowanda didn't get the press coverage of a single days conflict in the Middle East.

Good point.

Here in New York there is a non-profit PBS radio station called WBAI. If you listen to their news coverage after listening to one of the networks, you would think they are reporting from a different planet. They tend to do stories on many "major" events in the third world that do not even get mentioned by the network news.

Sponsored Links