Certain editorial positioning left intact for effect.
By Terry Friel
Stone chips fly as Rina, her face frowning in concentration, expertly crushes a rock to rubble in just a few seconds on the banks of a swift brown river in eastern India. With the skills of a professional, she deftly uses her hands and feet to reposition the pieces, dodging the fast, heavy strokes of her own hammer.
Rina is five. She has already been a professional rock breaker for a year, slaving six days a week in the sapping heat and humidity of West Bengal. "I like it," she whispers shyly, without slowing her hectic pace or looking up, wearing the same grubby and torn brown skirt and lime green top she wears almost every day. "But I would like to be in school."
Continued on Page 49
#1
Reuters bears direct responsibility for the existence of this human misery .... Reuters, BBC, The Guardian and so many other mainstream media outlets ... bear some part of the death and mayhem ....
Whatever.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
09/06/2004 14:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Little defensive there, Mike?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/06/2004 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Mike, how about a rant about the Jews controling the Gaurdian and BBC so that the atrocities can continue? Oh, and include Halliburton forcing the children to drill for oil in India!
Posted by: Charles ||
09/06/2004 15:35 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Mike, do you seriously deny that the media's soft soap approach to terrorism does not foster it all the more? Are you willing to suggest that their willful misreporting of civilian Iraqi causalty counts, which do not mention the numbers of fighting-age men included in them, doesn't have an unfairly polarizing effect upon public opinion?
How about the media's almost complete inability to actually call the terrorists "terrorists?" They call them just about anything but terrorists. What about the total lack of coverage regarding Saudi Arabia's government and their constant spewing of violently anti-American drivel? Do you contend that the glaring absence of any detailed reporting about how a putative ally incessantly foments jihadist doctrine has zero negative impact on American national security and the quality of life in the United States?
How much of this, not just slanted, but significantly detrimental bias should be permitted without any assignation of blame as regards those media outlets which essentially refuse to accurately depict the identity and alignments of parties who actively seek to do America horrendous evil? Do you maintain that al Jazeera does not cross the line with regard to facilitating terrorism and violence?
I'd like to see some cogent response from you on this topic, Mike. You yourself write at great length about terrorism but suddenly go all quiet about the role of accurate reporting in fighting this scourge. How come? Do you not consider this topic to be of importance? Are you willing to give BBC, Reuters and The Guardian a free ride as they continually downplay the intensely negative imapct that terrorism has upon our daily lives? Your own reply of "whatever" sure seems to shrug off any importance with respect to this obvious reportorial bias, despite glaring examples of it arising from the Beslan atrocity. Where should the line be drawn between editorial opinion and irresponsibly inaccurate or incomplete portrayal of vital world events?
With your own response, you've downplayed this critical issue and I'm rather interested to hear exactly why.
#5
Zenster, this sentence is absurd: itâs terrible that such child labor .... goes on ... but Reuters bears direct responsibility for the existence of this human misery.
Get a grip.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
09/06/2004 21:02 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Somehow, Reuters is able to whinge and bemoan the plight of these Indian child laborerswithout making the least connection to other ongoing atrocities, especially against women. Let us consider, for instance, the 97% rate of Egyptian female circumcision genital mutilation
?????????????????????????????????
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
09/06/2004 21:11 Comments ||
Top||
#7
That you are unable to recognize the deleterious effects of biased reporting is, simply put, pathetic. Have at it, Mike. But please avoid complaining when Sharia driven al-Madina come after your daughters for wearing something less revealing than a gunny sack.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
