London Bombings...this might sound really stupid

[MargeB]

I was just noticing the irony....the story is about a bunch of terrorist guys who try to get their way by drawing attention to themselves. Those then conveying the story (News programs, newspapers) fulfil this function by giving the terrorists almost permanent news coverage.

I know the News programs are just doing their job, but terrorists must be rubbing their hands at maxing out publicity. London people probably annoy the terrorists by making a point of carrying on their lives as normal. Wonder if we would reach a stage where news channels refuse to maximize coverage?

[nedflanders]

Seems like we have been kept in the dark ! Read this !

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/07/13/pakistan .attacks.thwarted.ap/index.html

[MargeB]

<p> alert!

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/07/13/pakistan.attacks.thwarted.ap/index.html

[MargeB]

Romeo, what will the news tell you about London that will affect your trip. The news gives the impression that the actions of the terrorists are of spectacular importance. They're not! This is my point! If they had a well equipped army, they would fight. They don't, so they try to manipulate people by terrorism. What are the facts of the bombings? Is there a threat? With all respect to those that died, there isn't, if you look at it properly (statistically). There are 14 MILLION people in London. 50 of them (RIP) died in this brutal act. That's 50/14,000,000. Did you know that the decision to introduce the Congestion Charge made a much greater change on the safety of living in London. Did that affect your decision to come?

It proves my point precisely. The news is not about 'News'. It's a window on the world. It says 'This is how the world IS'. They're WRONG. It's not how the world is. London was and is a safe place to be. Terrorism only works if they can convince us that small actions really matter. They don't matter and no amount of media shouting will convince me otherwise.

[MargeB]

Representational bias, I believe it's called.

[jno]

the point of news is to tell people what's new and different, not what's known and ordinary. Anyone who sees a bombing on the news and imagines it happens all the time is missing the point; if it did happen all the time it wouldn't be news.

[MargeB]

I know there are limitations, the world being the world and all. I was starting really from the premise: this is an evil act, what can we do about it? One feels pretty helpless: I guess its just my mindset: over a period of 5 years, I had to phone up some guy every couple of months and ask him the chances of me getting shot/blown up by some fanatical nutter. I got on fine for 5 years, then 20 of them decided it was my 'time'.!

Britain did a lot to try and stop terrorist actions. They failed, the terrorists got through the net. What were the terrorists trying to achieve? A core immediate goal was to maximize publicity: afterall, they had done the same thing in Madrid, swayed public opinion, PM sacked, pulled out of war against Islamic nation. To do the same in the UK, they need to set a few bombs, then exploit the UK press circus. Can we stop the bomb now? No. Can we report the news without turning it into a circus? Yes. But we choose not to. Why?

[Andy008]

I was always of the opinion that thejob of the media is to look at the world, and describe it.

[lizzierose]

just a point on the media. remeber the picture of the little girl in the street of the little girl covered in napalm? did anyone see the picture taken from the otherside which showed hundreds of photographers banked up taking photos of her? something just seems wrong there

[genthon]

I couldn't agree with you more MargeB.  I think news channels have a lot to answer for in the way they cover stories about terrorists especially those engaged in killing as many of their fellow muslims as they can in Iraq. 

[Becci_h]

Interesting as this thread is... consider the amount of interest you have generated yourself by posting the question, it is working just as the news does. you published a view point and others respond. all the responses to this question (and I include my own) are creating their own hype and attraction relationg to the bombings, on a national scale - thats all the news is doing.  people will always seek information and try to unravel the reasoning behind such things. the bombers know this, the news people know this and the public know this.

personally I don't think the purpose of the bombing was to create mass media coverage, that is a bi-product. the reason was to create an outrage and prove that we are vunerable as a nation. it wasn't even about how many they could kill, it was more about showing they could.