Should Our News Channels Be Giving So Much Time To The Paris Event?

[youngmafbog]

Now before I get attacked on here lets make one thing very clear. This is a terrible attrocity that should not be dismissed or forgotten

But that said we have our News channels playing 24*7 (Sky News seems to be showing little else) the BBC are currently interviewing a Muslim couple to show how wonderful they are - nice propaganda there with my money.

Surely this is playing into the terrorists hands? One of their aims is to spread uncertainty and fear, dedicating a channel to it must only serve as a 24*7 ISIS advert to the potential converts?

Now that there seems to be an acceptance we (The West & Russia) are at war should News blackouts be imposed or at least restricted to bare minimum reporting? This would at least be one tool in tackling the root issue - home grown Jihadists, and that's is where we need to be concentrating.

[Islay]

Perhaps by interviewing the Muslim couple the BBC are trying to show that not all Muslim's are bad!.

[ichkeria]

You seem to be contradicting yourself: is all this coverage really spreading fear, or is it all lefty propaganda with your money to show that all muslims are not evil two-headed baby eating monsters :-)
One way to spread fear, which I agree is what these people do, is to play on people's ignorance. In the absence of proper news, rumour can spread very quickly.

Aside form that, that is modern 24-hour news for you. By the weekend it will have eased off.
I do agree that it is irritating sometimes when so much coverage is given to one thing, and other events get overlooked especially when the "news" runs out. But this is still a developing "story" it would seem.

[jim360]

Personally I'd describe the idea that suggesting some Muslims aren't wannabe terrorists is just "propaganda" is playing into the terrorists' hands rather a lot more than extensive news coverage of a large-scale attack that led to the deaths of over 130 people.

[Canary42]

Much as I often disagree with your abhorrent views (including the snide dig at the BBC in your second paragraph - it's your money which funds the commercial channels bigger budgets too), you make a very good point here (for a change).

Denying ISIS the oxygen of widespread publicity is a ploy which should undoubtedly be exercised.

[naomi24]

//Denying ISIS the oxygen of widespread publicity is a ploy which should undoubtedly be exercised. //

I disagree. Only madmen are impressed by their actions. With the oxygen of widespread publicity the rest of us are becoming increasingly disgusted.

[Hopkirk]

Watch 'Homes Under The Hammer' instead.

[jim360]

To some extent the West has been trying to deny ISIS "the oxygen of publicity" by largely ignoring the issue at its source -- in Syria, Libya, etc. -- at least in terms of actually doing something that will be likely to defeat them. This isn't entirely surprising as the public as a whole lost any appetite for large-scale military action in the Middle East. Perhaps the coverage given to this event will give non-interventionists pause for thought. Or perhaps not, as they might argue that we should stop air strikes altogether rather than commit to further military action.

Either way, our response to the attack in Paris is an important and ongoing story and it therefore should be on the news.

[IggyB]

Blocking certain topics from news coverage would be difficult these days, in the event that the govt could control tv news content the internet would just fill the gaps. I know we all have some issue with certain media groups but they are all more responsible than randomly produced websites.

Freedom of the press is probably one of the western values ISIS disagree with.

[Peter Pedant]

yeah too true YMF

do you get more troof if you impose a black-out ?

yeah of course you do

also it allows the authorities to intern without trial ( remember there is a troof black out so we wouldnt know eva ) dangerous elements like well Youngmabog springs to mind - and no one would know
and no one would be there to say - hey YMF is one of the good fellas !

keep up the political thought YMF !

[ToraToraTora]

I often wonder this, clearly it needs reporting but that is what they want. It's like the 1 mins silence etc, it would be better to show that this sort of thing is ineffective somehow. Difficult for the media to get it right really.

[Peter Pedant]

Yeah troof balck out good idea

The concrt massacre in Moscow was compounded by the news black out.
They used a gas which stopped people breathing but instead of first aiding, piled them onto buses where around 100 died as a direct result

of course there was a terrorist troof black out so no one knew the troof - that is the hsotages had died from the negligence of the authorities ( Army again - not the brightest in Russia ) and not the terrorists

[bazwillrun]

"Much as I often disagree with your abhorrent views (including the snide dig at the BBC in your second paragraph "

oh the irony....

[vetuste_ennemi]

"To some extent the West has been trying to deny ISIS 'the oxygen of publicity' by largely ignoring the issue at its source -- in Syria, Libya, etc. ... Perhaps the coverage given to this event will give non-interventionists pause for thought."

The issue "at its source", eh, Jim. So you think Islamic terrorism began with ISIS' arrival and will disappear with its demise?

[Ric.ror]

Actually attacks by Islam extremists are not uncommon in France
The first attack by Hezbolah was in 1985

And I don't care if I have spelt this abhorrent regime wrong

[naomi24]

//it needs reporting but that is what they want. //

They don't care what we think. They really don't. They will do what they do regardless.

[sevenOP]

youngmafbog:- "Now that there seems to be an acceptance we (The West & Russia) are at war..."

And when was that multilateral consensus reached and by whom ?- (Is the war between the West and Russia?)

"Will ye who has the real truth stand up and cast the first testimony?"

The reason why "...Our News Channels Be Giving So Much Time To The Paris Event?" is so intimately intertwined with Booldawg's thread http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Society-and-Culture/Question1456890.html
as to be morally uncomfortable for the vast majority of people.
( think global tribal catechism )

[jim360]

"So you think Islamic terrorism began with ISIS' arrival and will disappear with its demise?"

No, I don't. The latest wave of it certainly is, though. As long as ISIS about the problem is probably worse than it has ever been -- at least Al-Qaeda had no pretensions to forming a global caliphate.

[youngmafbog]

//(Is the war between the West and Russia?) //

Are you for real?

[sevenOP]

"And when was that multilateral consensus reached and by whom ?"

[Khandro]

"And when was that multilateral consensus reached and by whom ?"
According to my source of information; - my wife who is reading "Europa und das Kommende Kalifat" (Europe and the coming caliphate) by Bat Ye'or.
It began in the early days of the European Union by some who were actually ex-Nazis and unelected, siding with Yasser Arrafat and the Palestinians against Israel. Extraordinary contracts were signed including the relaxation of entry by Muslims into Europe.
I'll give you chapter and verse if you want, but you will have to wait 'cos she's gardening at the moment!