In response to the posts before mine highlighting the problem with the media outlets showing the videos and reporting Islamic State.
Yes. But... social media? The "real problem"? Really?
Not the crazed, dangerous, knife-wielding maniacs? The murderous, blood-thirsty nihilists wanting to kill their way to a caliphate? But Twitter and Facebook?
In response to the posts before mine highlighting the problem with the media outlets showing the videos and reporting Islamic State.
Yes. But... social media? The "real problem"? Really?
Not the crazed, dangerous, knife-wielding maniacs? The murderous, blood-thirsty nihilists wanting to kill their way to a caliphate? But Twitter and Facebook?
I think you are missing Col's point.
'A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.'
In response to the posts before mine highlighting the problem with the media outlets showing the videos and reporting Islamic State.
Yes. But... social media? The "real problem"? Really?
Not the crazed, dangerous, knife-wielding maniacs? The murderous, blood-thirsty nihilists wanting to kill their way to a caliphate? But Twitter and Facebook?
I think you are missing Col's point.
'A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.'
But surely "religious fanatics" is the bigger problem, not "social media"?
All very well with saying that, and I agree to an extent, but the real problem is social media. A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.
If anything the use of "real problem" is probably slightly wrong I perhaps should have used "bigger problem"
In response to the posts before mine highlighting the problem with the media outlets showing the videos and reporting Islamic State.
Yes. But... social media? The "real problem"? Really?
Not the crazed, dangerous, knife-wielding maniacs? The murderous, blood-thirsty nihilists wanting to kill their way to a caliphate? But Twitter and Facebook?
I think you are missing Col's point.
'A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.'
we did our best to blot out "Lord Haw Haw " in the 2nd world war and i think ALL the media should act more responsibly ...sanction twitter/social media if they allow it to be used for such purposes ....i dont know how you do this ...if necessary just take social media down (you may think i am being a bit reactionary) but we cant allow it to be used in this way ..this isnt some filmscript its all terrifying real and we dont seem to be doing too much about it
All very well with saying that, and I agree to an extent, but the real problem is social media. A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.
If anything the use of "real problem" is probably slightly wrong I perhaps should have used "bigger problem"
No, even that is miles out. The " bigger problem" is the message, not the medium.
In response to the posts before mine highlighting the problem with the media outlets showing the videos and reporting Islamic State.
Yes. But... social media? The "real problem"? Really?
Not the crazed, dangerous, knife-wielding maniacs? The murderous, blood-thirsty nihilists wanting to kill their way to a caliphate? But Twitter and Facebook?
I think you are missing Col's point.
'A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.'
we did our best to blot out "Lord Haw Haw " in the 2nd world war and i think ALL the media should act more responsibly ...sanction twitter/social media if they allow it to be used for such purposes ....i dont know how you do this ...if necessary just take social media down (you may think i am being a bit reactionary) but we cant allow it to be used in this way ..this isnt some filmscript its all terrifying real and we dont seem to be doing too much about it
"Take social media down" because some people make abhorrent views that "we" (whoever that is) don't want people to see those views?
Who is the "we" who "can't allow it to be used this way"?
Don't get the 'The media should not be showing these pictures/videos'. I think it is vitally important that every child in this country is required to watch the graphic videos showing what the allies found when they first entered the concentration camps at the end of WWW 2.
I don't want people in authority telling the media what it can and cannot show me about what is going on in this world. Islamic extremist ideology today is as evil as the Nazi ideology was 70 years ago and it is important that every atrocity committed in its name is fully and graphically reported.
IS is not some teenage group craving attention. Their mindset and intention is to form a caliphate of extreme Muslim ideology and they will succeed unless the world sits up and takes notice. The media be it news or social is critical in portraying these world peace threatening extremists for what they are.
A few tweets and Facebook recruiting campaigns are the least of our worries. I think we are on the brink of the most dangerous period in world politics since the Cuban missile crisis.
To do nothing and treat them like attention seeking naughty boys will spell disaster.
I get what everyone is saying but I think I've been misunderstood. I didn't suggest we ignore what is going on in Iraq and Syria and hope they stop. I think we all know how serious this extremists are; they have already slaughtered a number of local people including women and children, those too vulnerable to flee.
I still maintain my view though that by printing full and graphic images of the hostage killings, our media are somewhat playing into the extremist's hands. You don't need to see a knife wielding maniac to accompany the news that an innocent man has been murdered.
Nor am I suggesting that a higher authority tell the media what and who to print, I think those responsible for printing should be able to realise this for themselves.
The other thing that winds me up is the liberal use of "Jihadi John". Are his mates "Islamic Ian" and "Murderous Mark"?
No, they are "Jihadi Paul" and "Jihadi George". But, in m view, none of these names should be used. They are utterly and unspeakably evil - so giving them nice, "friendly" nicknames is the wrong thing to do.
I get what everyone is saying but I think I've been misunderstood. I didn't suggest we ignore what is going on in Iraq and Syria and hope they stop. I think we all know how serious this extremists are; they have already slaughtered a number of local people including women and children, those too vulnerable to flee.
I still maintain my view though that by printing full and graphic images of the hostage killings, our media are somewhat playing into the extremist's hands. You don't need to see a knife wielding maniac to accompany the news that an innocent man has been murdered.
Nor am I suggesting that a higher authority tell the media what and who to print, I think those responsible for printing should be able to realise this for themselves.
Social media and the internet simply allows any nutter to disseminate their views. Personally, I don't see much difference in the media's role impacting on outwardly normal people who latch on to wholly implausible conspiracy theories and a jihadist latching on to the teachings of extreme Islam, its just that extreme Islam spawns murderers.
It is not the media that is the problem, it's our natural human inclination to want to seize on propaganda to support a prejudice. Its why some read the Daily Express and some read the Guardian and nothing is going to change, its just another propaganda war with something much more important at stake.
Conspiracy theorists just help the other side in this war and are too dumb to realise. Heard a guy on the radio say "How do we know Jihadist John is not the CIA". How do we know he is not the Pope or Simon Cowell ffs.
I get what everyone is saying but I think I've been misunderstood. I didn't suggest we ignore what is going on in Iraq and Syria and hope they stop. I think we all know how serious this extremists are; they have already slaughtered a number of local people including women and children, those too vulnerable to flee.
I still maintain my view though that by printing full and graphic images of the hostage killings, our media are somewhat playing into the extremist's hands. You don't need to see a knife wielding maniac to accompany the news that an innocent man has been murdered.
Nor am I suggesting that a higher authority tell the media what and who to print, I think those responsible for printing should be able to realise this for themselves.
But also the British public putting their fingers in their ears and saying lalalala, isn't going to make life any better for the people that have to suffer through this.
Do you think the public would actually care about ISIS if we weren't subjected to these images? They'd just wash over it like they do with the Syrian civil war nowadays, or Israel/Hamas recently. Those atrocities haven't stopped, we're just no longer seeing the devastation so no longer care.
I get what everyone is saying but I think I've been misunderstood. I didn't suggest we ignore what is going on in Iraq and Syria and hope they stop. I think we all know how serious this extremists are; they have already slaughtered a number of local people including women and children, those too vulnerable to flee.
I still maintain my view though that by printing full and graphic images of the hostage killings, our media are somewhat playing into the extremist's hands. You don't need to see a knife wielding maniac to accompany the news that an innocent man has been murdered.
Nor am I suggesting that a higher authority tell the media what and who to print, I think those responsible for printing should be able to realise this for themselves.
But also the British public putting their fingers in their ears and saying lalalala, isn't going to make life any better for the people that have to suffer through this.
Do you think the public would actually care about ISIS if we weren't subjected to these images? They'd just wash over it like they do with the Syrian civil war nowadays, or Israel/Hamas recently. Those atrocities haven't stopped, we're just no longer seeing the devastation so no longer care.
I get what everyone is saying but I think I've been misunderstood. I didn't suggest we ignore what is going on in Iraq and Syria and hope they stop. I think we all know how serious this extremists are; they have already slaughtered a number of local people including women and children, those too vulnerable to flee.
I still maintain my view though that by printing full and graphic images of the hostage killings, our media are somewhat playing into the extremist's hands. You don't need to see a knife wielding maniac to accompany the news that an innocent man has been murdered.
Nor am I suggesting that a higher authority tell the media what and who to print, I think those responsible for printing should be able to realise this for themselves.
But also the British public putting their fingers in their ears and saying lalalala, isn't going to make life any better for the people that have to suffer through this.
Do you think the public would actually care about ISIS if we weren't subjected to these images? They'd just wash over it like they do with the Syrian civil war nowadays, or Israel/Hamas recently. Those atrocities haven't stopped, we're just no longer seeing the devastation so no longer care.
It's a sad state of affairs, I agree. I actually feel that more should be printed of those two conflicts as I believe the situations are, and should be treated, different.
ISIS want the world's attention, by getting it we can only guess at the number of European and American citizens that have gone to join them. Countless more have grown fearful of similar attacks taking place on home soil.
I still think that there would be enough uproar about the beheading of an innocent British citizen and aid worker, without the need for seeing the knife that did it being wielded all over front pages.
Where ISIS are concerned it's the graphic images that they WANT you to see that I object to being printed, not the reporting of the incident.
Comments
Not the crazed, dangerous, knife-wielding maniacs? The murderous, blood-thirsty nihilists wanting to kill their way to a caliphate? But Twitter and Facebook?
'A lot of the young people in this country who have gone abroad to fight for religious fanatic groups have done so after watching videos and reading articles promoting their propaganda.'
Glad it wasn't just me that post made sense to.
Who is the "we" who "can't allow it to be used this way"?
Do you think the residents of Iraq and Syria (the vast majority of the members) sit down to watch Sky News or visit twitter every evening?
I'd rather the media focused their attention on reporting and remembering the man he was, not how he was killed.
I don't want people in authority telling the media what it can and cannot show me about what is going on in this world. Islamic extremist ideology today is as evil as the Nazi ideology was 70 years ago and it is important that every atrocity committed in its name is fully and graphically reported.
A few tweets and Facebook recruiting campaigns are the least of our worries. I think we are on the brink of the most dangerous period in world politics since the Cuban missile crisis.
To do nothing and treat them like attention seeking naughty boys will spell disaster.
I still maintain my view though that by printing full and graphic images of the hostage killings, our media are somewhat playing into the extremist's hands. You don't need to see a knife wielding maniac to accompany the news that an innocent man has been murdered.
Nor am I suggesting that a higher authority tell the media what and who to print, I think those responsible for printing should be able to realise this for themselves.
agree entirely
It is not the media that is the problem, it's our natural human inclination to want to seize on propaganda to support a prejudice. Its why some read the Daily Express and some read the Guardian and nothing is going to change, its just another propaganda war with something much more important at stake.
Conspiracy theorists just help the other side in this war and are too dumb to realise. Heard a guy on the radio say "How do we know Jihadist John is not the CIA". How do we know he is not the Pope or Simon Cowell ffs.
Do you think the public would actually care about ISIS if we weren't subjected to these images? They'd just wash over it like they do with the Syrian civil war nowadays, or Israel/Hamas recently. Those atrocities haven't stopped, we're just no longer seeing the devastation so no longer care.
ISIS want the world's attention, by getting it we can only guess at the number of European and American citizens that have gone to join them. Countless more have grown fearful of similar attacks taking place on home soil.
I still think that there would be enough uproar about the beheading of an innocent British citizen and aid worker, without the need for seeing the knife that did it being wielded all over front pages.
Where ISIS are concerned it's the graphic images that they WANT you to see that I object to being printed, not the reporting of the incident.