The failure of the media, In two ways. Options

[*CrackedRearView*]

DISCLAIMER: This is not for the faint at heart.

1) The only thing I ever see on this forum, aside from a select few's educated reasoning when it comes to opposing U.S. occupancy in Iraq, is mindless, CAPS LOCK laden, unsubstantiated prattle saying 'BUSH IS AN IDIOT, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG IN IRAQ! AFGHANISTAN WAS THE PROBLEM!'.

Let me do the job the media failed so miserably at.

If there was any doubt of the problems in Iraq -- let that doubt be put to rest.

2) I was watching the news tonight, and I got, for lack of better terminology, extremely pissed off.

'Another car bomb exploded today killing several soldiers.'

'Another car bomb'. As if it's standard protocol; as if the wives and children bereaved of the victims of 'just another car bomb' don't matter. Just another number to tack onto the list.

Thanks for serving in the Army, son. What was your name, again?

I'm sorry, but I just can't handle that. As much as I support this war.

So, to make this less of a rant and more of a debate: why do you think the media focuses so intensely on the lack of problems in Iraq, when there are so many?

Is it acceptable that the media showed only what little was wrong in Iraq? Is it acceptable that because we've been there for two years, we can just shrug off another car bomb?

[visualfusion]

Due to the laziness and worthless of Americans today, repeated news of car bombs will bore the living wits out of us and since the media needs its viewers to be entertained to get high ratings (and ultimantly money) ... the media just shrugs off these "little" repeated things that (because of the repetition) no longer has the excitement it had in the beginning of all this shit. Failure of media? Not really, just a money hungry, bored, lazy, and (yet again ... also the lack of terminology) worthless America.


but then again, I have no idea what I'm talking about.