Quote:
Originally posted by denim
All of the people over there are heros, no question. They've offered up their own necks to back the word of the USA. Fine so far, yes?
|
Absolutely. Lay it on me....
Quote:
|
What's exceptional, at least to me, about this athelete's story is that he had it made. He would have been rich and safe, with everything any of us want, and far from war. He gave it up, just like the others. So in a sense, he sacrificed more.
|
So....his sacrifice was considered greater because he gave up money?? He had a family and a plethora of friends. Why not celebrate that? The media, however, instead of focusing on the man, chose rather to celebritize the fact that he turned down a lucrative contract. All subsequent questioning seemed to focus around the money. (i.e. "Why do you think he turned down the contract? "Why did he not take the money? Why did Pat turn down millions of dollars...etc.) This was the opportunity for the media to bring a light on the real sacrifice soldiers make. Using a relatively famous face to highlight the hundreds of thousands of other soldiers who give up family and friends. Instead they made a fluff story with little substance and repeated it ad nauseum.
Quote:
|
Otherwise, sure, it was a slow news day. Really, a situation like this where you have a person who is famous, at least in some circles (I'd never heard of him), who gets killed trying to save his mates, is always a big story. They did the same kinds of things in previous wars when well known people were involved. It's not like this is a new thing.
|
No, it's not a new thing. Everyone knows the stories, in the past, however, the news coverage of such events hardly compares to today's news coverage. Like I said above, this was an opportunity to show the "good American," who gave up his fledgling family to serve his country without praise and fanfare to the whole world. Instead it came off as a story about an American who's greatest accomplishment was forbearing
money.