Bad Journalism

[novon]

Why has the BBC reported Bush used the word "crusades" (Any of the military expeditions undertaken by European Christians in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries to recover the Holy Land from the Muslims) when he used "crusade" (A vigorous concerted movement for a cause or against an abuse)
?

 

[novon]

bush - "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a long time "

 

[TripleJ]

I think you're getting your nickers in a twist for nothing.

 

[chiwawa626]

theres more then one meaning:

A holy war undertaken with papal sanction.
A vigorous concerted movement for a cause or against an abuse. See Synonyms at campaign.

take the second one...

 

[novon]

Oh, it isn't nothing, a lot of people listen to the BBC, specially in other countries, and to misinterpid as Bush saying crusades will not doubt give the wrong idea to these people.

 

[chiwawa626]

eh ... oops...well they are the bbc they say colour....u get the point.

 

[Pocatello]

I don't think George Bush should use the word "crusade". Right or wrong many people associate the word crusade with murder, rape, and destruction.

 

[Alienwho]

I'm sick and tired of Americans having to try so hard not to offend other countries just because a word that is no big deal to us gets other countries panties in a bundle. Get it through your heads that just because Crusades might mean that to you, doesn't mean it means it to us, and he is not offending anybody by saying that, he is speaking the way we speak.

Hell, when the brits use the word "Water Closet" I get offended because it makes me think that somebody is urinating inside a closet. Gawd the things people get riled up over is so lame.

 

[Pocatello]

We cannot launch military strike from America. We must use bases from the Middle East and Pakistan and part of Russia, all are occupied by Muslims.

 

[ultimatebob]

Hey, British Journalism isn't the only bad journalism that I've seen in the past week. Lots of NETWORK TV news stations openly discussed rumors that they heard during the reporting of the attack, seemingly without any fact checking at all. Not suprisingly, many of these rumors like the supposed "counter attack" by the US Tuesday night,turned out to be false. Why aren't they doing research on these statements, insteading of rushing it to press?

The amount of patriotic slant is starting to get on my nerves, and I'm starting to feel like I'm just being fed a bunch of pre-war propaganda coming out of what's left of the Pentagon. Where's the objectivity? At first I was angry at those few brave people who are saying that we are rushing to judgement, because they were being "unpatriotic". Now, I'm just wishing that TV stations would let these people speak publicly, so people will stop waving their flags and reflect on their actions for a moment.

And, finally, WHY DO THEY KEEP SHOWING THOSE $&#@ BUILDINGS COLLAPSING EVERY 30 MINUTES!?! Don't they realize that they are indirectly showing the murder of thousands of people each time they show that? No wonder everyone is having such a hard time recovering from this tragic event.

 

[Jfur]

I noticed the exact same thing in our local paper. How idiotic to use such a loaded word!

 

[Jfur]

<< I don't think George Bush should use the word "crusade". Right or wrong many people associate the word crusade with murder, rape, and destruction. >>



and warring religions... :frown:

 

[FrontlineWarrior]

we get the world trade center destroyed and we still have to worry about not offending people? anyone see something wrong with that?

 

[weezergirl]

wait, so did he use the word crusade then? if so, why is it bad journalism if they are just quoting him?