If it bleeds, it leads

» Are news networks the real terrorists?

   
 

= Adam Tatelman
fi Staff Writer

[es my sincerest empathy
to those affected by the Paris
bombings. Fear, anger and
sadness are all natural reactions
to the random cruelties of

the world, and we must never
forget that the truly amoral

and brutal people of the world
are always fewer in number
than the decent and kind.

I have never liked the way
news networks react to these
tragic events. The endless media
circus that presents itself over
the days that follow seems to
take on the tone ofa reality TV
program, where the audience

waits in suspense for each tearful :
: school shooter types—typically
: isolated loners with serious

: mental issues—would be

: incapable of organizing any kind : be more attacks day by day.
: of secret club for school shooters. :
: The very idea is laughable. And
: yet, when the same personality
: types claim that their violent

: actions are dictated by the

: call to Jihad, suddenly they

: must all be organized.

testimony and epiphanic crumb
of evidence.

1 do not mean to say that
these events shouldn't be
covered. Of course the public
has a right to know. But it’s easy
for news networks to exploit
the emotional nature of these
events for ratings. And when
networks use the facts of the
event to push an agenda, I find it
disrespectful to the people who
lost their lives and loved ones.

Consider the outcry against
ISIS in the days following the

: attacks. Every political debate,

: news report, and public address
: made use of the Paris bombing

: to show how evil, powerful,

: organized, and secretive ISIS

: are, and how important it is

: to band together to stop their

: terrorist doings. Hard to argue

: with, but feel-good calls to action :
: usually are. If France decides to
: go the way of post-9/11 America
: in its foreign and defensive

: policies, they will have to

: contend with the same problem
: that the Bush administration

: did: making a disorganized

: enemy seem monolithic.

If I said all perpetrators of

: school shootings were somehow
: connected, most would rightly
: call me a lunatic. The statement

is patently false because the

There are many outspoken

: radical sects, but they have little
: to do with one another in their
: actions. Even those who associate :

themselves with ISIS before

: or during a violent act do not

: exhibit any sort of consistency.
: Their “terror attacks” always

: occur at random in different

: countries around the world

: with months or years of silence
: following. Ifthey were a truly

: organized global terror unit with :
: leaders and a budget, there would :

: French government is currently
: debating to what extent Syrian

: ISIS “bosses” were involved with
: the stadium bombers. Not ifthey :
: were involved, but to what extent. :
: There is no evidence at present to :
: suggest that Syrian ISIS cells had :
: any hand in the planning or the

: bombing, nor that their help was

 

CNN reports that the

even necessary. The bombing

: itself was low-tech, and could
: easily have been accomplished
: by the five bombers alone.

: And yet, the CIA insists that

: the attack took months to

: plan and was encouraged

: by foreign ISIS powers.

: otherwise ISIS would not seem
: like a credible threat. This best
: expresses an idea I’ve believed

: for a long time: the most

: effective terror tactic is media

: kill? Would radical jihadists
: be? These groups could not ask
: for better advertising, and yet

THE MODERN DAY NAZIS

Americans are being
murdered and if bu
jihadists can, they TLL
massacre millions of us.

ee
OReilly——

Points Commenta a,

Screenshot via fox news

Talki

: national news networks seem
: only too happy to provide it.
In 2014, Nightcrawler
slithered in and out of theatres
: to the sound of momentary
> acclaim. The thrust of the film
: was that human beings have a
: primal fascination with the guts
: and gore of violent crime reports.
: “If it bleeds, it leads,” as the
: saying goes. Death’s the cheapest
: drama there is, and there’s no
: way to stop people from tuning
: in to watch. But we should all
: be critical enough to separate
: the facts from the spin, and
: always remember that the news
: isno different than Hollywood
: film—a product made to appeal
: to the broadest possible audience.

The media, of course,
leads with this idea because

advertising. If the perpetrators
of school shootings received no
coverage following an attack,
would they be as motivated to

 

Religious hypocrisy

» No Merry Christmas but everyone prays

Davie Wong
Sports Reporter

ypocrisy. You can find it

everywhere in the world
these days. Stories, music,
corporate companies, and
especially social media forums
are marred by the filth that is
hypocrisy.

Just what am IJ rambling
about? How about the fact that
Starbucks chose to leave the
saying “Merry Christmas” off of
their season cups for fear of being
too religiously biased, yet they
posted a tribute to the victims
of the November 13 attacks with
#PrayforParis attached.

The dictionary defines
hypocrisy as “the practice of

or beliefs to which one’s own
behaviour does not conform.”
Starbucks actions clearly show a
form of hypocrisy. By removing
the saying “Merry Christmas”
from their holiday cups, the
organization makes their stance
on religion clear. They would
rather not be affiliated to one.
The conclusion that
Starbucks does not wish to be

: affiliated with a religion comes

: from two assumptions. First

: they removed the saying because
: of the name Christmas, which

: refers to the birth of the religious :
: figure, Jesus Christ. Second, they :
: completely removed any saying
: or image (besides their logo) from :
: the cup instead of replacing the :
: words.

If they wanted to not just

: be affiliated to Christmas, they
: could have included various

: statements involving other

: holidays, such as Hanukkah.

: They could have even done it

: in several different languages.

: The fact that they completely

: removed any saying or symbols
: from the cup proves that they

: would rather not be related to
claiming to have moral standards :

any religion.

: That’s fine. In fact, that’s how :
: alot of people feel. But then they :
: went and included #PrayforParis
: in their statement about the Paris :
: attack. If I understand companies :
: at all, the statement was PR-

: related and has nothing to do

: with their views. They simply

: did it because everyone else was
: doing it.

But Starbucks isn’t the only

: one responsible for religious

: hypocrisy. Well to be frank,

: any non-religious people that

: were a part of the #PrayforParis

movement are guilty of religious
hypocrisy. Praying is defined as:

: “A solemn request or expression

of thanks to a deity or other

: object of worship.” Ifyou declare

: that you do not believe in a god

: or gods and then start praying

: for anything, you are committing
: religious hypocrisy.

In that sense, praying is

: abad word to use for a global

: trend. You would think people

: would realize that. After all,

: if“Merry Christmas’ is too

: religious to be used, I don’t

: understand why praying isn’t too
: religious as well.

My recommendation? Use a
more generic synonym for these
sorts of thing. Perhaps the word

: “condolences” or “sympathies”

would be more appropriate. I
understand that trend-setters

: love the use of alliteration but

: stop using religious terms if

: you wish to be considered non-

: affiliated with religion! It’s

: contradictory to your beliefs, and
* looks hypocritical to the world.

 

4
[s)
is)
2
im

a
a

“a

G
~
oo

of)
S
C0)
f=)
oo
E|

fis