Two very, very short rants...

[Random Variable]

1) It is maddening to hear people (especially Hollywood celebrities) blame the foreign policies of the United States for all the world's problems.

2) The role of the media is to inform the American people, not to aid the terrorists by inciting fear.

Thank You

 

[mastertech01]

It is especially interesting to me, that MANY of these same celebrities are the ones who defended the Clinton administration to the death, yet it is primarily the foreign policy of the Clinton administration and all the budget cuts to our defense and law enforcement agencies which precipitated the major reasons for the attacks and thier successfull accomplishment on the US today. IMHO

 

[mrCide]

i for one don't give a rats ass what celebs say, they're no one important and their opinion doesn't count

 

[khtm]

<< i for one don't give a rats ass what celebs say, they're no one important and their opinion doesn't count >>


I agree 100%
Too bad they have such a big impact on simple-minded, easily-impressed people, though.

-khtm-

 

[clarkmo]

It isn't what the celebs say.It's what they do in the movies that counts. Anyone see Swordfish? A $9.3 billion black bag anti-terrorist assasination group sounds pretty good about now

------------------------------------------------------------
Its Anyone seen not anyone see.Your warned!

Anandtech Prose Mod

 

[KBrinks]

90% of celebs are morons currupted by hollywood... only celebs i can see that are down to earth and no all big headed, are people liek tom hanks n sh!t... who acually know there is a world outside their movie trailers

and i agree with you 100% on the 2nd rant

 

[jjones]

has anyone ever cared about what a celeb says; like there is any validity to their views on anything aside from seeking publicity?

 

[Random Variable]

<< and i agree with you 100% on the 2nd rant >>



There is no need for the media to say over and over again that the anthrax sent to Senator Daschle's office was "weapons-grade" or "high-grade" because not only are the terms extremely vague, they have the effect of creating more unnecessary panic. Maybe I'm overreacting, but it seems as though the media is terrorizing us more than the terrorists are.

 

[Lucky]

<<

<< and i agree with you 100% on the 2nd rant >>



There is no need for the media to say over and over again that the anthrax sent to Senator Daschle's office was "weapons-grade" or "high-grade" because not only are the terms extremely vague, they have the effect of creating more unnecessary panic. Maybe I'm overreacting, but it seems as though the media is terrorizing us more than the terrorists are. >>





Then turn off your goddamm TV! How much simpler can it be?

I dont want pansies that are scared of a little anthrax talk determining what I am able to watch.

 

[Random Variable]

<< Then turn off your goddamm TV! How much simpler can it be? >>




<< I dont want pansies that are scared of a little anthrax talk determining what I am able to watch. >>



Can't you ever disagree with someone without having to resort to childish name calling, or is that beyond your capabilities?

 

[Jfur]

FOXNEWS sux andshould be very, very ashamed!

 

[Zenmervolt]

<<I dont want pansies that are scared of a little anthrax talk determining what I am able to watch.>>

You miss the point. Vespasian is NOT afraid of the anthrax talk, rather he sees it for the sensational tabloid "journalism" that it is. There have been 36 cases of exposure to or contraction of anthrax out of about 280 million people, that's 0.00001% of the US population. (Actually, it's 0.00001285714...% with the 285714 repeating according to my TI-85, but I rounded.) The media, however, is presenting anthrax as though everyone is in immediate danger, which is simply not true. Unfortunately most people cannot see through the hype.

Zenmervolt

 

[BlueApple]

<< It is especially interesting to me, that MANY of these same celebrities are the ones who defended the Clinton administration to the death, yet it is primarily the foreign policy of the Clinton administration and all the budget cuts to our defense and law enforcement agencies which precipitated the major reasons for the attacks and thier successfull accomplishment on the US today. IMHO >>



But there was a republican congress durring that time.

Just giving you a taste of your own medicine.

 

[Lucky]

<< <<I dont want pansies that are scared of a little anthrax talk determining what I am able to watch.>>

You miss the point. Vespasian is NOT afraid of the anthrax talk, rather he sees it for the sensational tabloid "journalism" that it is. There have been 36 cases of exposure to or contraction of anthrax out of about 280 million people, that's 0.00001% of the US population. (Actually, it's 0.00001285714...% with the 285714 repeating according to my TI-85, but I rounded.) The media, however, is presenting anthrax as though everyone is in immediate danger, which is simply not true. Unfortunately most people cannot see through the hype.

Zenmervolt >>





No, I dont miss the point. Those 36 cases are more than we have faced in what, the last 50 years combined? 100 years? The media is not saying everyone is in immediate danger. I hear the networks stressing daily that its not contagious, that its hard to spread. I've heard them re-iterate the govt's point that the general population is not at risk. Have you heard any respectable news outlets in the US printing 110 point headlines screaming "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!"???

What they are doing is presenting the possibilities of what could happen. I'm sorry, but 36 cases or 36,000 cases, when we are in a war of monumental importance, and we are being attacked by biological agents, I want to know all that I can about this.

I really, really dont get what you want the media to do. Shut up about anthrax? Just ignore it? You're right, the role of the media is to inform us (the world, really). But along with that comes the possibility that it might incite fear. What would you rather live in, fear or ignorance? You can't just live in a bubble your whole life.


Can't you ever disagree with someone without having to resort to childish name calling, or is that beyond your capabilities?


Seriously, if its so "maddening" to you, what is the problem with turning of the TV set or or not tuning into CNN 24/7?

 

[Random Variable]

<< Seriously, if its so "maddening" to you, what is the problem with turning of the TV set or or not tuning into CNN 24/7? >>



I said it was "maddening" to hear people blame the foreign policies of the United States for the world's problems. Do you even read what someone writes before you respond? :|



<< You miss the point. Vespasian is NOT afraid of the anthrax talk, rather he sees it for the sensational tabloid "journalism" that it is. There have been 36 cases of exposure to or contraction of anthrax out of about 280 million people, that's 0.00001% of the US population. (Actually, it's 0.00001285714...% with the 285714 repeating according to my TI-85, but I rounded.) The media, however, is presenting anthrax as though everyone is in immediate danger, which is simply not true. Unfortunately most people cannot see through the hype. >>



Thank You

 

[Lucky]

<< Seriously, if its so "maddening" to you, what is the problem with turning of the TV set or or not tuning into CNN 24/7? >>



I said it was "maddening" to hear people blame the foreign policies of the United States for the world's problems. Do you even read what someone writes before you respond?



Huh? I realize what you said, and responded to it. You are obviously hearing them blame the US on TV. Therefore, problem is solved if you turn the TV off or dont watch CNN.

Please, respond to my arguments directly, and dont take the easy route and quote someone else who agrees with you. I'll ask again.

What do you want the media to do? Shut up about anthrax? Just ignore it? You're right, the role of the media is to inform us (the world, really). But along with that comes the possibility that it might incite fear. What would you rather live in, fear or ignorance? You can't just live in a bubble your whole life.

 

<< 2) The role of the media is to inform the American people, not to aid the terrorists by inciting fear. >>



You are not very versed in what the media is then are you?

 

[Random Variable]

<< Please, respond to my arguments directly, and dont take the easy route and quote someone else who agrees with you. I'll ask again. >>



No, I won't respond to your arguments. I have no desire to prove that I'm right and you're wrong, especially since you don't know how to debate someone without mocking them.

 

[Wallydraigle]

I'm not a celebrity, but I play one on TV.

 

[Cyberian]

<< You're right, the role of the media is to inform us >>


And it has nothing to do with selling more newspapers or garnering a larger share of the Radio/TV audience?

 

[Random Variable]

<< And it has nothing to do with selling more newspapers or garnering a larger share of the Radio/TV audience? >>



That's the problem