 |
Why I Prefer Foreign News Outlets |
 |
A simple juxtaposition of the BBC’s and CNN’s front page stories again demonstrates why major American news outlets — particularly those whose preferred medium is television — are a national disgrace:
From the BBC, first story on the front page: “Foreign Forces’ Worst Afghan Toll”
It seems June was the deadliest for foreign troops in Afghanistan since the 2001 fall of the Taleban. On the first day of July, with the toll officially tallied, this no doubt qualifies as an important story.
On CNN.com’s front page , however, one has to scroll down to the tiny print at the bottom of the page to find the headline on deaths in Afghanistan, and even then it’s an ambiguous “Troop Deaths in Afghanistan Surpass Iraq.” Depending on your persuasions you could interpret the headline either positively (violence in Iraq is so low!) or negatively (Afghanistan’s falling to pieces!), that is, if you even managed to spot it.
So, what other stories trump the fact that troops in “the forgotten war” are dying at an alarming (but obviously not alarming enough) rate? Sadly, exactly the type of stories you’d expect from “the most trusted name in news.”
Is Osama bin Laden dying…again?
Did Bill Clinton diss Obama?
Obama offered shirt off woman’s back
Cops: Man collected, drank boys urine
Cat Held hostage for dog’s return
Will Smith, ‘I was scared’ of flying
Odor masking wash, dry & go toilets
In the midst of two wars this type of negligence is criminal. It’s absolutely inexcusable that foreign media, as well as domestic print media, need to query the public “Remember Afghanistan?” Times like this I’m exceptionally grateful to the internet; imagine how easy it was to railroad public opinion before we could vet US media against its international analogues.
It’s pretty sad but here in America our attention span is ….hey look, puppies!