3 ms·
I don't understand how media outlets that report on terrorism (by which I mean the 24hr coverage cycle) aren't charged with being accomplices or accessories to
by SimbaOnSteroids 9y ago
I don't understand how media outlets that report on terrorism (by which I mean the 24hr coverage cycle) aren't charged with being accomplices or accessories to these terrorist acts. We know what terrorism is, mass murder + widespread knowledge of aforementioned murder + political motive.
Look I'm not saying we just trash the 1st amendment but there has to be some reasonable compromise that can be made in cases where violent crime is used in order to grab headlines for some political cause. I'm not saying don't do any reporting on terror either but there's gotta be some hard line of what's definitly being irresponsible.
- mmjaa 9y agoThe most reasonable compromise that could be made is to force western media to report on the casualties of the war being waged by western military forces. We'd all be far less inclined to knee-jerk react to a 'terrorist attack' if we were more aware, daily, of just how many civilians WE have killed recently. Alas, nobody wants to hear that news.
- SimbaOnSteroids 9y agoWe could also put minimums on the rate at which new information appears on screen.