[lbo-talk] Questions about Osama Bin Laden

[Carrol Cox]

The web has changed the _source_ of information as well. A Tonkin Bay 
hoax would probably still work unless several enlisted men or officers 
babbled. But this happened in the middle of a populated area. Reporters 
were already interviewing residents -- and their editors could have 
edited! But I presume some of those residents were on the web. Fred 
Hampton's murder came out in part because no one at the Tribune paused 
over the photo they printed the next morning, hence from the beginning 
the planed story couldn't work: the photograph showed too plainly that 
no shots had been fired from inside. And the bloody bed was too glaring. 
But of the many My Lais, only the one got out, and that was much later. 
News that "everyone" knew no one really knew.

Doug is right that some news is going to be lost as the media cuts down 
on its expenses. But some is going to be gained as well.

Carrol

On 5/4/2011 4:23 PM, dperrin at comcast.net wrote:
> So Wikileaks came years after the fact? What does that have to do with my overall point? There was no public internet in 1964. This is all historical speculation, as is much of the analysis, official and amateur, about bin Laden's execution. The point is, with instant global info coming from countless sources, statist propaganda has changed. It had to. Just look at Obama's mouthpieces falling all over themselves to paint the most heroic picture of their hit job. Why would they do that if the public had 1964 methods of communication? The Web has changed much. Ask anyone in the newspaper, publishing. music, movie/TV biz.
>
> Personally, I don't know why Obama simply states that this was an execution of an unarmed, captive man. The majority of the public would cheer anyway -- perhaps even more strongly. This new tale about bin Laden reaching for a weapon is right out of a cop drama. Pretty sad.
>
> Dennis
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>