The CBC loves the word “terror”. If a squirrel gets run over by a car, the CBC correctly points out that it was not a terror attack. However, the police are still investigating. The squirrel may have been wearing a turban.
Today, a man– who appears, at first glance, to be mentally disturbed– attacked some soldiers at a recruiting center. Almost all of the media outlets incorporate the word “terror” into their news coverage even though there is no evidence, as of yet, of any links to any terrorist organizations.
A man attacks military personnel with a knife and is arrested and no one dies. Such a Canadian crime story. In my opinion, the attempts to link or unlink the incident to “terrorism”– a word the all of the media loves– is confusing to me. What is the point? Is it less awful if it’s not “terror-related”? Is it more awful because he is Islamic? Do the people who feel the urge to label it as terrorism feel that other people don’t understand how awful the attack was if they don’t? Is it all just politics? How many similar incidents involving people being attacked and harmed by someone disturbed or not receive similar coverage?
Well, we know why. If you are scanning radio stations looking for something to listen to you don’t stop at the thoughtful explanation of how the financial crisis unfolded and why millions of people lost their retirement savings. No, you stop at the word “terror”.
Even if the CBC and CTV correctly report that the man has no links to any terrorist organizations, the trumpeting of the word itself serves to inflame and provoke, to keep the public mindful of this terrible threat roaming our world just waiting to strike out us!
Yes, let the government into my iPhone!
No– that’s not what those people want. They want the government to be let into YOUR iPhone.
You’re welcome.
[whohit]Terror! Terror! Terror![/whohit]