When do we report the news?

[kochman]

Interestingly, there was no note taken on several channels for the death count of US troops dying in Afghanistan reaching 2,000.
It is interesting, because, it is news... and, it was definitely reported when it was Iraq.
What gives?

Here are the channels that made no mention...

ABC, NBC, the PBS NewsHour – or even on the MSNBC

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gr...msnbc-skip-2000-marker-afghanis#ixzz1yWnXYjnn

It was reported on CBS and FN

 

[JollyRoger]

Maybe they are still waiting to get to 1 on their WMD count in Iraq.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

What's so significant about 2000 anyway? It's such an arbitrary number, only really significant in base 10. Why don't we consider it significant with 1983 soldiers died, or when 574 soldiers died?

Seriously.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Alas this is sadly reflective of a quote...

A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What's so significant about 2000 anyway? It's such an arbitrary number, only really significant in base 10. Why don't we consider it significant with 1983 soldiers died, or when 574 soldiers died?

Seriously.

I love these all-too-frequent celebrations of the decimal number system.

And let's hope it doesn't reach 3,000. Or even 2,001 for that matter...

 

[warpus]

What's so significant about 2000 anyway? It's such an arbitrary number, only really significant in base 10. Why don't we consider it significant with 1983 soldiers died, or when 574 soldiers died?

Seriously.

Exactly.

It's an arbitrary number - it's not a newsworthy event unless you spin it into one.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

2000 too many

 

[timtofly]

Exactly.

It's an arbitrary number - it's not a newsworthy event unless you spin it into one.

We probably should not have heard when it happened in Iraq either.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

We probably should not have heard when it happened in Iraq either.

If it's an arbitrary number now, it was probably an arbitrary number then. As horrible as it is for anyone to die in Iraq, it's not suddenly more significant when the number has a bunch of zeros on the end.

 

[timtofly]

Are we debating numbers or the news?

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Are we debating numbers or the news?

Is there a distinction? The number IS the news.

 

[Quackers]

The left-wing media doesn't want to draw attention to Obama's war and his failed articulation on the reasons why American troops are still in Afghanistan. What are these men dying for?

 

[kochman]

What's so significant about 2000 anyway? It's such an arbitrary number, only really significant in base 10. Why don't we consider it significant with 1983 soldiers died, or when 574 soldiers died?

Seriously.

Why were they sure to report it in Iraq, "Bush's War"...

Exactly.

It's an arbitrary number - it's not a newsworthy event unless you spin it into one.

See above...
It's not arbitrary, it's a milestone.

We probably should not have heard when it happened in Iraq either.

Yep

If it's an arbitrary number now, it was probably an arbitrary number then. As horrible as it is for anyone to die in Iraq, it's not suddenly more significant when the number has a bunch of zeros on the end.

Again, milestone...
Anyhow, missing the point here IO... it was news when it could be used to hurt Bush... not news when Obama faces re-election?
Coincidence? I doubt it.

Of course, the lefties here are all quick to jump at it being a coincidence... that should be telling.

 

[JollyRoger]

Why would 2,000 dead over a decade in hurt Obama? As for the count under Bush, all the cakewalk talk and Mission Accomplished nonsense just made him an easy target for such milestones.

 

[Zelig]

When do we report the news?

When it's profitable.

I recommend public broadcasting.

 

[timtofly]

Is there a distinction? The number IS the news.

So now the news is arbitrary?

@ JR

You mean the war did not end when Obama took out Osama?

It just ended because it is not newsworthy any more?

 

[JollyRoger]

The war is still going on and may still be going on long enough to hit another milestone. We wouldn't want to cut and run now would we?

 

[kochman]

Why would 2,000 dead over a decade in hurt Obama?

What a stupid question

 

[JollyRoger]

What a stupid question

I'm playing down to the level of competition.

 

[timtofly]

The war is still going on and may still be going on long enough to hit another milestone. We wouldn't want to cut and run now would we?

If I said yes, would I be any different than those who said yes 7+ years ago? If I said no, I would still feel the same I did 7+ years ago.

I would not be patriotic, or is that nationalistic if I say pull out before the job is done, no matter who is attempting to get the job done.

I think that it is quite possible to still live in freedom, even if China or say Russia took over the reigns as world police, since I did not elect to be born in the US.