Go to The Impossibility Of Knowing
- Add a comment
- Go to Are We Not Being Told Or Is There Little To Tell?
TAPS_ THANKS
posted by
Azur
on June 13, 2006 at 12:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Blanche01, I don't know if it is an edge. It's just what fires me up
Unfortunately it makes me less interested when at local events and the small talk tougher
posted by
Azur
on June 13, 2006 at 12:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Azur, very interesting. Both the post and the comments.
posted by
TAPS.
on June 13, 2006 at 12:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Azur, I guess that being interested in international news gives you an edge
a wider perspective, but being able to evaluate facts is a learned skill.
posted by
Blanche.
on June 13, 2006 at 11:24 AM
| link to this | reply
Blanche01, Passionflower, DarrkeThoughts, Bel_1965, MandaLee, Symphony
Blanche01, research is part of my job. I taught a course in journalistic research early this year and even I learnt a lot. I know I am not normal ha ha in that I am just as interested, if not more so interested, in what happens in the wider world than on my own doorstep. I always preferred working on international news than domestic news. I think there is inherent bias in groups of bloggers too. Strong opinions based on too little research.
Passionflower, yes that's what I read too. Did you see that picture of a mountainside with some holes in it? It doesn't seem much like Hiroshima to me. I once visited the museum and peace park at Hiroshima and saw the images of what it was like there. I think the Norwegian astronomer was a bit sloppy to make that comparison.
Thanks mandalee, symphony
DarrkeThoughts, I think there are plenty of people who are interested in meteors and well-researched science stories. The people who want sensation are not really interested and will move on to the next thing. Bel_1965, I too have been in the environment "If it bleeds, it leads" but thank goodness like you say they are not all like that. I think that many things are hidden, small errors and incompetencies that affect people's lives and that is where journalists can do their best work. Often the big conspiracy theory stories are promoted by those seeking to divert attention from their own inefficiencies.
posted by
Azur
on June 13, 2006 at 11:20 AM
| link to this | reply
Azur, great research
I believe both things happen: that there is inherent bias in the media corporations, which favor the interests of large corporations, especially Time-Warner, Rupert Murdoch, etc.
There is a natural human tendency to be more interested in what is happening closest to home. I've heard it described it as being something along the lines of the degree of magnitude has to increase accordingly for it to be of interest locally. A local robbery is of more interest to the readers or viewers than a murder in a foreign country. It's a degree of impact.
However, in this case, I don't think there is much to be gained for the government to hide a comet or meteorite landing, so it seems to me that you're right, the verification and sources are lacking. I take everything I read on the web with a huge grain of salt, other than the NY Times or other reputable outlet.
posted by
Blanche.
on June 12, 2006 at 4:05 PM
| link to this | reply
I checked out the stories and it appears that the meteor
landed on a remote mountainside harming no one. I didn't realize that Norway often gets meteor showers and that their govt's defense dept tracks these things.
posted by
Passionflower
on June 12, 2006 at 10:17 AM
| link to this | reply
posted by
Amanda__
on June 12, 2006 at 7:18 AM
| link to this | reply
Plus it has to be sensational...I think a meteorite may not be up there enough to sell papers. Comparing it to the A-bomb is creative, but not realy hard to believe. Are they saying it's the same size, hit with the same force? But there is no radioactive fallout, and apparently not a lot of dead people near the sight of impact. So why would we care anyway?
posted by
DarrkeThoughts
on June 12, 2006 at 7:18 AM
| link to this | reply
Azur
I agree, I don't think it's anyone is actually conspiring to keep the news for us. I think it's a combination of what you suggest lack of confirmation and also a lack of interest as in the end nothing really happened to anyone. I am sorry I have been around too many papers where the concept is "If it bleeds, it leads" there wasn't blood, therefore many did not have the interest.
Working with the paper I did last year, I got to know a few of the reporters. They would not run a story ever without a secondary confirmation and at least one of them had to be willing to go on the record because they were also very protective of their sources. As much as this seems like things are being hidden, it is not. We have all seen bad stories get out of hand on our national media only to discover part or all of it was full of untruths.
I think it's sad that such and event has not been covered better, but I don't believe that it's an intended cover up.
posted by
bel_1965
on June 12, 2006 at 5:48 AM
| link to this | reply
posted by
_Symphony_
on June 12, 2006 at 5:41 AM
| link to this | reply
Passionflower, it's an interesting theory
but I can't help thinking that if no one saw it apart from one farmer that there is little incentive to concoct a meteorite. "People on the whole........ in chat sites" would not be enough to publish with. Get someone at the Pentagon to deny it and then there might be a story.
posted by
Azur
on June 11, 2006 at 10:42 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks for the great links...But I DO believe there's a cover-up...
I visited a few chat rooms...Bec there has been so little coverage of the incident, people on the whole tend to believe that this is some type of "Weapon" fired by our govt from space in order to try it out.
The testing of a new weapon fired from space would be hard to cover up. Saying that a meteor hit the earth instead would be much better recieved by the public.
posted by
Passionflower
on June 11, 2006 at 10:31 PM
| link to this | reply