@thelog 480839 wrote:
Response to massacre in Syria urged – World News – MSN News UK
This is just awfull, aparantly the bbc were saying they had footage too gruesome to show. I don’t need to see it ti be frank, I know what sick things humans can do to each other.
To be fair Auntie is doing the correct thing here – there are good reasons why a minimal level of censorship is enforced by “Western” broadcasters.
in the late 1980s, the former dictators of Romania (now a EU nation) were overthrown and executed, literally riddled with bullets. No court or trial, their own soldiers took matters into their own hands.
Their corpses were shown on the national TV. When this got relayed by “Western” broadcasters the images were viewed as shocking.
years later, the TV news cameraman was interviewed. He was apologetic and regretful – not for filming the shootings – but because (unlike the soldiers!) he “missed!”. The original intention was that the entire execution was to be filmed and broadcast. but back then (in fact until recently) portable video cameras used tape cassettes, and something called “pre-roll” meant that the recording only started a few seconds after pressing the button. He felt he had failed in his duty to fully record a turning point in his countries history. TBH as a photographer and video maker myself, I can sympathise with him – he is morally no worse than the soldiers, and his job is to capture the news, good or bad.
However – what happens when there isn’t censorship of extreme violence, is that folk get desensetised to it. Where I work, people die all the time (as it is a care home for those at end of life) and I see nurses get desensetised. However, it helps them cope, and they have strong training and management that their job is to care for people even if they have barely a few days left. but with angry young men watching TV news (or even violent movies), they get the impression that violence works (and in reality in the short term it does). the same also happens to journalists covering these conflicts, which either makes them take excessivce risks or take sides (both are bads). There are groups of young men especially fighting back like in Libya or other countries, the existing army is then targeting the civillians where they live or have arms depots. but 70 years ago, Northern European nations did exactly the same to one another in World War II.
The real problem though is there is absolutely jack shit the UN or anyone else can do without sending in foreign soldiers into someones country, and no “bright side” even when these folk get their peace or a better regime. Folk in these countries end up with these dictators is not because they prefer them aren’t hard enough, but because in previous centuries Europe colonised these nations for their resources. The only way the Europeans were kicked out was by war, and usually these dictators have some relation (by ancestry or active service) to liberating the nations from colonialism. This is also why they tend to turn to strong government and strong religion, which keeps young men especially on their toes and being wary of any attempt to re-colonise their nation.
Also there are dodgy deals especially in London and Washington where certain dictators are tolerated in return for low price oil. Tony Blair gets a lot of stick from the left wing and in some cases rightly so, but I still feel he went to war as much due to the will of the people (the 2000 fuel protests etc) as any imperialist tradition or trying to suck up to the Yanks, as he was smart enough to realise the relatively peaceful and affluent times of the 2000s were worth protecting. If by some miracle Iraq and Afghanistan people had just handed over their country to US/UK corporates and petrol was now 50p a litre, there would be statues of him gone up as a military hero and I bet even “left wing” people would be praising him.
But even if/when the Middle East becomes free, the end result will most likely be a form of moderate Islam and social democracy, a bit like Malaysia today but perhaps more nationalised industries. They would demand a fair price for oil, and we’d be looking here at £3.00 or similar a litre. it won’t be the end of the world but won’t be taken well and I wouldn’t want to be any sort of Middle Eastern immigrant – you’d probably end up with armed cops at petrol stations like Heathrow used to have…
