The press is increasingly the tool of the "insurgents". In fact, look at the article and photo run by several news agencies and tell me what you think: a very special effect
Aiding and abetting or just pure incompetence? I think it's more like corruption: they make money by showing things blowing up ... and to spin the story to make it sound as significant as possible. Showing all the cars that didn't blow up doesn't sell their papers.
So, here's the real question: why do we pay for news? It used to be that it took a lot of money to send people around the world with cameras, send the film/photos back home with a story, print it on paper, and deliver the papers back out around the world. Then it took a lot of money to run a news station and broadcast nationwide, or internationally, to everyone's living room. But now? If you pay for news, the news is already spun to be a tempest ... with no mention made that it resides in a teapot.
Welcome to the new millennium where you can trust the internet and your own intelligence more than the big news agencies. Let me be the first to predict the demise of, and coin the term, "old stream media".
(update: I just googled "old stream media" and there were 9 hits; so I guess I was only one of the first).
Posted by rick at February 1, 2005 04:30 AM