From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 20:40:36 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Net and Terrorism.
In-Reply-To: <ae0204ac01021004e601@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.94.960705025834.17213A-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> At 2:37 AM 7/5/96, vinnie moscaritolo wrote:
> 
> >>There is no cure for the "revolutionary" terrorists ..
> >> If we do not even print their obit, there is no glory!
> >
> >Tim, you are asking for the liberal media to act responsibly.. what were
> >you thinking?
> 
> I did not write that.
> 
> However, I wouldn't think that "not printing their obit" is acting
> responsibly. As far as I'm concerned, I want the full news, or at least
> some reasonable approximation of it, not propaganda.

The issue here is that terroristic actions *are* propaganda. Does every
idiot with a bomb deserve to be really big news? 

Anyway, I don't think Vinnie was suggesting that the news be censored --
just that the press doesn't have an obligation to print the obituary the
"martyrs" want. There's a spectrum from "the popular front for the
liberation of kooks, which believed blah blah blah because blah blah blah,
just blew up a building" to "some kook just blew up a building." The latter
is usually sufficient. If I care about the kooks, I can look them up, but
I don't think the fact that they blew up a building gives them the right to
propagandize the front page of my newspaper.

-rich