Quote:
Originally posted by Pacifier
it is not about right or wrong, it is about this influence. Thinnk about moore what you like, but this speech whould had a different impact on the public if all the people were cheering or all the people were booing. The public would feel different about it. and that kind of manipulation is a big "no-no" for me.
|
You *assume* that the public would have reacted differently. You also *assume* that a lot of people cheered. If I am to believe some of the other posters here, that wasn't the case.
Besides, Moore is just as manipulative as you say the media is; he highlights only what he wants to say, and disregards the rest.
Quote:
Like western media showed very little war casualties to make the war look prettier?
|
Yeah, and like the Arab media showed only the casualties and Iraqi propaganda to make the US look bad. Even though the casualty level was *extremely* low...
If showing Iraqi casualties would stop the US public from supporting the war, even though that would leave Saddam in power, and lead to more casualties in the end... I don't blame the US media for not showing those casualties.
We all know that there were casualties - we heard the (inflated) numbers from the Iraqi propaganda minister, after all. Filling the TV screens with amputated limbs all day isn't going to change the reality: US forces tried to prevent hitting civilians, while the Iraqi regime did their best to kill (or have the US kill) as many of them as they could.
And I'll say it again: the casualty level was *low*, by any historical standard. Even worse, if the experience of the last gulf war can be applied here, most of those casualties were the result of *Iraqi* anti-aircraft fire... Oops. (Yes, those bullets do eventually come falling down again!)