Media coverage

[anotheoldgit]

Can anyone tell me why the Israeli conflict gets 24 / 7 coverage from the media, and yet our own involvements in Iraq and Afgahanstan gets very little if any coverage? Is it because if we acutely knew the full extent of what is happening in these hell holes, then public opinion would be much stronger, to get the hell out?

[El D]

Quite possibly - if you speak to anyone who is in the picture i.e. in contact with those out there the situations are much more hostile than people realise.

[maxximus]

yes, it is my opinion that the israeli palestinian conflict has been used often in the past, going way back to cause a diversion or as i like to say to switch channels on us to take the focus off of things elsewhere. but this time seems to be different, it would appear israel is part of the so called grand plan for the (so called) new middle east, and as our enemy must always have a face it has morphed from osama to the taliban to alquaeda to saddam to zarquawi to hamas and hezbollah and the so called real evil ones(that they refuse to talk to)and been mentioned from the very beginning, syria and iran. as they have supposedly been supplying all of the above all along as they hate democracy(sound familiar)even though it is o.k. for the u.s. and u.k. to fund and arm israel. so in today's world if you illegally invade another country you are spreading freedom and democracy and if you defend your country your leader is a dictator, your country is a rogue state and you are a terrorist, or the lesser politicaly correct term insurgent. all rather perverse, no!

[Toureman]

All the media are interested in is sensational news, in a few days or weeks they will find some other "sensational news" and the middle East will dissapear from the TV.

[jno]

it's not because it's sensational (though it is) but because it's more recent. New news is seen as newsier than old news.