|
Posted by on June 16, 2008, 7:47 am
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:15:46 +0100, Lizzy Taylor
>The Wanderer wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 07:37:20 GMT, Candide wrote:
>>
>>> Towards children, there is this:
>>> http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_9596223?source=most_viewed
>>
>> I don't think it's any more prevalent to day than it ever used to be; I
>> just think we hear about it now when once we wouldn't know what was was
>> going on in the next town!
>
>Now we can hear about what has happened in other countries and
>continents via the internet and the radio before more local stories have
>been printed on the pages of the daily newspaper. In some ways the
>constant undercurrent of bad news reduces its effect - it can all too
>easily become a case of "not again", rather than "How on earth could
>they do THAT!" Unfortunately it also means that you are more likely to
>hear bad news about far off places and end up with a very skewed view of
>them.
>
>Lizzy
Yes, as it's the bad news that the media digs into.....so we hear more
of it. Not to mention they seem to really go out of their way to
spread the doom and gloom.....
Marie
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap