Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marginmike who wrote (13351)	9/13/2001 10:43:54 AM
From: oldirtybastard	Respond to of 209892

see this? I had never paid attention to their terminology, figures though a188.g.akamaitech.net For the American media, which are in something of a Defcon-3 mode themselves, the shock of the attacks may change the very terminology they use. While virtually all news organizations described the carnage as the work of "terrorists," they have often avoided that term when reporting attacks against Israeli civilians. When a Palestinian bomber killed 15 people at a Jerusalem pizzeria Aug. 9, the New York Times ("suicide bomber"), Los Angeles Times ("the militant Islamic movement Hamas"), USA Today ("suicide bomber"), Chicago Tribune ("militant Palestinian organizations"), "NBC Nightly News" ("militant Palestinian group Hamas") and ABC's "World News Tonight" did not use the word "terrorist." The Washington Post called it a "terrorist attack" and the "CBS Evening News" a "terrorist massacre." Clifford May, a Republican strategist working with the pro-Israel group American Middle East Information Network, says the reluctance to properly label such attacks "was either an act of cowardice or an act of journalistic malpractice. When it hits home, it's easier to decide. No newspaper would write, 'Militants struck the World Trade Center yesterday,' or say, 'They may think of themselves as freedom fighters, and who are we to judge, we're newspeople.' "