DesideriScuri -> RE: The Insensitive Boston Thread (4/16/2013 8:54:39 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Jeffrey Goldberg is far from my favourite columnist. But he certainly caught my sentiments about the horrible events in Boston when he penned the following: Boston Bomb Attack No Excuse for Media Speculation "[....] But after an explosion about which we know almost nothing, and in the face of sudden, violent death at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, this is not the time to guess about the perpetrators or to recommend policy fixes that would prevent such attacks from taking place. It certainly is no time to suggest that a political party you happen not to like is to blame for a tragedy about which you know nothing. In an era in which none of us like to leave anything unsaid, and in which technology offers us the opportunity to say things fast, we often succumb to the urge to speculate. Shortly after the 2011 shootings in Norway, I asked publicly whether a Mumbai-type attack had visited Europe, the implication being that Muslim terrorists were behind the atrocity. It was perfectly plausible to suggest that Muslim terrorists were to blame -- except that they weren’t. I learned my lesson. Tomorrow or the next day, when law enforcement officers and journalists have done their work, there will be time to analyze and criticize and learn from whatever it is we just saw. But not today. Please, let’s wait to find out who did this and why it happened." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-15/boston-bomb-attack-no-excuse-for-media-speculation.html Let's take his advice and devote our thoughts to those whose loved ones were killed and injured. There will lots of time to analyse these events and learn such lessons as we can later The problem, as I see it, with this "anti-speculating" idea is that the news networks have pretty much conditioned us to expect instant information. Running with the idea that "we don't know what really happened so we're not going to offer any explanation" isn't what the masses want. The masses want answers, almost instantaneously. If News Network A isn't offering anything, switch to News Network B, etc. until we get the information we are craving (forget for now that the information may not have any basis in reality). With advertising dollars the way they are, it behooves news networks to pose explanations and speculate with the "we think" disclaimer, knowing that most people aren't going to hear the "we think" part anyway. The reality of situations like this are that no one knows what happened (except the perpetrator) immediately after the incident. Speculating is what We do. It makes it ridiculously difficult, for those of us what want just the facts, to find out what happened.
|
|
|
|