I've been pretty disappointed with CNN and the BBC

So imagine my surprise when I found CBS offering proper coverage.

They mention casualties, but don’t focus on them.

They’re not stampeding across the desert with videophones, showing blurry images of what could be tanks or tractors.

They don’t repeat every image over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

They give the most detailed military situation and point out the coming reality of block-by-block fighting in Baghdad and even Basra.

CBS was also the network that had its cameras tracking people down the side of the WTC as they plummeted to their deaths during the 9/11 attack.

I know the arguments for and against. But I found it personally distasteful, to the point that I’ll no longer watch any CBS News productions. And I’m not even the boycotting type.

[Edit: Typo]

Ouch, I hadn’t realized that.

That’s quite ghastly.

I’m curious, why did you think it was distasteful?

More distasteful than the average episode of Fear Factor, aka, “guess what’s coming to dinner” ?

Hey, there’s an idea. Fear Factor could make WTC widows eat bugs.

lol… Jason, you never cease to surprise me with your utter lack of respect, tact, and common sense. I am shocked you need an explanation. Actually I’m not since you track record is one of complete cluelessness.

lol… Jason, you never cease to surprise me with your utter lack of respect, tact, and common sense. I am shocked you need an explanation. Actually I’m not since you track record is one of complete cluelessness.[/quote]

You idiot, he’s just waiting for someone to say ‘cause they showed people dying’ so he can jump in with ‘YET YOU SUPPORT A WAR WHERE PEOPLE WILL DIE???////’ in some kind of shocking twist that somehow proves his point.

Why is it distasteful to show someone jumping out of a building on television? Distasteful to the family, or the person involved, or is just showing death distasteful? Is it only so if its real death, but its ok to show fake death? Does the blood factor matter?

I don’t get it. News is news.

I would think that putting the bodies falling on TV would aid the war cause more than anything. Not showing them shields people from the full horror.

But if they ARE put on TV then it’s just another right wing conspiracy to drum up support for the war. sigh It’s a catch twenty-two. But I for one am for the voluntary censorship, no one wants to be afraid to turn on the TV in case they see their son’s bloody corpse.

Somehow I would think the death itself would be a lot more traumatic than seeing it on TV. TV can’t trump the reaper.

Because, of course, Saddam himself pushed those guys out of the windows of the burning Twin Towers.

I’m telling you people, you’ll be on much less shaky ground if you stick with the weapons of mass destruction stuff. When that gets flimsy, retreat briefly to humans rights abuses. But leave the 9/11 connections to Art Bell’s callers.


Not that this was the point being made, but since Tom chose to make it (by the way Tom are you just cutting and pasting that response to every post, or are you typing it in after reading the posts?)

Just curious - when they remembered the alamo - did they only go after the mexicans that fought at the Alamo? After Pearl Harbor, should we have stopped once we sunk the carriers that launched the attack?


Are you suggesting we should have taken China while we were in the neighborhood? Or maybe annexed Canada in response to the Alamo?

I don’t agree at all. It’s the job of journalists to show a piece of truth, not to protect the feelings of a certain mother. It’s impossible to say (or show) anything meaningful without offending someone.

If people are so afraid of the truth that they won’t turn on their TV anymore, they might finally realize what a terrifying world they live in. Mainstream media however tends to treat everyone like children who need to be protected from unpleasant facts.

The newfound “voluntary censorship” is also nationalistic (to avoid the blurry term “racist”). Do they have a problem when the dead human being is an African, an Arab, a Chinese? These guys have mothers too, you know. No, they only get sensitive when Americans are affected.

Excuse me if I got worked up, but I believe if anything has the potential to destroy humanity, it’s patriotism turning into fanatical nationalism.

I was actually referring to the war in Afghanistan, but didn’t make that clear. Sorry for the confusion.

Tim Elhajj - huh?

To elaborate, but i thought it was pretty clear so I have no idea where you are getting your post from, but then Tom’s mystifies me as well.

As we remembered the Alamo, did we only go after those exact soldiers that attacked the alamo leaving any Mexican soldier alone who was not directly involved in the battle? Same with Pearl Harbor, were we retaliating against the forces that powered the attack or only the individual attackers? In both instances were we retaliating against the nation of the attackers, or only the individual attackers themselves?


Chet I’m not sure I understand you here, can you clarify? Are you suggesting that we should go against all Arabs because some Arabs attacked us on 9-11?

If you want to suggest we should go after all Islamic fundamentalists because some Islamic fundamentalists attacked us on 9-11, I might agree with you on that, at least somewhat. However, Saddam’s regime is not an Islamic fundamentalist regime, quite the opposite.

Okay, Chet, I’ll bite:

So you’re saying al-Qaeda is to Iraq as the Japanese carriers that attacked Pearl Harbor are to Japan? Or, in your own words, Iraq is “the force that powered [al-Qaeda’s] attack”?

You might want to present whatever evidence you have for this connection to the Bush Administration, because I’m sure it would be very helpful for them to make the case they’re so fervently wishing for. But in the meantime, would you be so kind as to share it here?

If, on the other hand, you’re just making general allegations about supporting international terrorism, you might want to rework that Alamo and Pearl Harbor analogy a bit. But you might also want to explain to the Administration that they attacked the wrong country. Iran is a little further to the right, Syria is off to the left, and, oh, well, let’s not get into Saudi Arabia, since that’s a bit too messy.

At any rate, like I said, you’re going to have a much easier time of it if you stick to those other excuses for the war.