IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Hmm ... this is interesting
Terrorists depend on publicity to spread fear.

"Lone gunman"-types sometimes do it specifically to become famous.

Shock art sometimes shocks purely as "click bait".

In all these cases, displaying the shocking thing may be giving someone exactly what they want. I wouldn't want our media to be so easily manipulated. See "Black Mirror - The National Anthem" for a perfect example of where that leads.

In this case I would still have run the picture, because the story was about the violent reaction. I would not have run the picture if the story were, "Here is a magazine trying to offend Muslims."
--

Drew
New Yup.
One of the things that seems to infuriate the Right about Obama is that he doesn't "let his Luther out". We all know that little kids do lots of bad things for attention, also too.

If the Charlie Hebdo cover were pulled from Google and the rest of the Internet, then publishing it everywhere would make sense. We'd be fighting censorship on our end, too. As it is, publishing the cover on American papers and blogs doesn't really affect anything in a positive way. It's not going to make ISIL or AQAP change their behavior. (Just like Sullivan changing his blog color to green didn't change anything in Iran's protest.) But it might make the situation worse (e.g. by feeding into skin-heads tendencies).

Sometimes not doing something is the best response.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Re: It's not going to make ISIL or AQAP change their behavior.
No. But it would let them know that we haven't changed ours.
     Islamists win again. - (mmoffitt) - (29)
         Holy Cow. The NY Post is more responsible than the NY Times? - (mmoffitt) - (14)
             Why? - (Another Scott) - (13)
                 Here's why. - (mmoffitt)
                 I actually agree with mmoffit on this one - (drook) - (10)
                     Understood, but I disagree. - (Another Scott) - (8)
                         Hmm ... this is interesting - (drook) - (2)
                             Yup. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                 Re: It's not going to make ISIL or AQAP change their behavior. - (mmoffitt)
                         Re: Understood, but I disagree. - (pwhysall) - (4)
                             Yes, seems quite the ostrich position: both vulgar and vulnerable. -NT - (Ashton)
                             Yeahbut... - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                 You're reaching and you know it :) -NT - (pwhysall)
                                 Danish, not Dutch. -NT - (CRConrad)
                     A rare subject heading indeed. ;0) -NT - (mmoffitt)
                 The Charlie Hebdo paper is selling out like crazy. - (a6l6e6x)
         With fundamentalists, idiocy abounds! - (a6l6e6x) - (1)
             Tilt! -NT - (mmoffitt)
         So what did you think of the New Yorker cover in 2008? - (static) - (4)
             I understand that. And the article contains BS. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                 so the first ammendment is tango uniform? -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                     You mean it isn't? Where's the Hebdo drawing on CNN/NY Times/etc. sic nauseum. -NT - (mmoffitt)
             Thanks.. principled and illuminating. - (Ashton)
         More on Charlie and France... - (Another Scott) - (6)
             In a perfect world ... - (drook) - (2)
                 Interesting. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                     Remember that "devil in the details" bit? - (drook)
             The Continental way - (scoenye) - (2)
                 Thanks for the confirmation of what I thought was the case. - (a6l6e6x)
                 Re: on the map... - (Another Scott)

I just KNEW the Good Humor Man was behind this...
70 ms