Terrorists attack the Media
- Thread starter Chrispi
- Start date
OH GOD, NOT MY TV! Let e'm take out Fox and Disney, we don't need e'm. BUT NOT MY CNN AND MY HISTORY CHANNEL! I need them to live... damnit!
well, they didn't hit Time/Warner, so we'd still have Fox. But wouldn't these attacks actually be worse, as they'd be hitting buildings in the heart of NYC, instead of the twin towers, bad as that was?
Hey! Dave! Let's not try to gloss over this TV thing! No Nip/Tuck! No Sex in the City! None of Paris Hilton's new show in reruns?!?
That's it. People are dying for this. Many, many people.
That's it. People are dying for this. Many, many people.
Are you being serious about this?
This is like, no this is trying to destroy a company by annihilating its board of directors. The loss of middle management would be worse. The new leaders would take over quickly. But they would be West Coast, rather than East Coast. So expect entertainment to be even more tasteless than it already is. The televised news system would weaken almost, but never quite, to the point of extinction (well, at least compared to where it is now). Decentralized Internet news would dominate.
The same trends as are already happening; the attacks would simply accelereate things.
This is like, no this is trying to destroy a company by annihilating its board of directors. The loss of middle management would be worse. The new leaders would take over quickly. But they would be West Coast, rather than East Coast. So expect entertainment to be even more tasteless than it already is. The televised news system would weaken almost, but never quite, to the point of extinction (well, at least compared to where it is now). Decentralized Internet news would dominate.
The same trends as are already happening; the attacks would simply accelereate things.
Defeats the purpose
The purpose of a terrorist attack is to strike fear in a population with limited military resources. The more public it is the more effective it is and the more attention it brings to your cause. It is not effective if no one knows about it. A few hundred well publicized deaths is much more effective than a million unknown.
The purpose of a terrorist attack is to strike fear in a population with limited military resources. The more public it is the more effective it is and the more attention it brings to your cause. It is not effective if no one knows about it. A few hundred well publicized deaths is much more effective than a million unknown.
Rather than a single, concentrated stroke, suppose the terrorists had sent individuals (in twos & threes) to various major media outlets in the larger cities during the morning shows and detonated themselves in the studios.
Another alternative, sabotoge movie sets.
Or perhaps over a period of time, slip into a 'Tonight" show studio and explode
This would have given the media an experience with terrorism 'up close & personnel'
Would this have impacted their approach to future activities?
Would the media still have taken a negative view of homeland security?
How would the need for greater security affected media activities?
If you really wanted to get America upset, attack the media and curtail the availability of new programming & movies.
Another alternative, sabotoge movie sets.
Or perhaps over a period of time, slip into a 'Tonight" show studio and explode
This would have given the media an experience with terrorism 'up close & personnel'
Would this have impacted their approach to future activities?
Would the media still have taken a negative view of homeland security?
How would the need for greater security affected media activities?
If you really wanted to get America upset, attack the media and curtail the availability of new programming & movies.
Guiman said:
I suppose the terrorists could target the Super Bowl (stealing the idea from Tom Clancy). It is about the most heavily televised event in the US, so that would be a major attack. I imagine the media probably would take a much stronger pro-government line than they usually do during whatever military campaigns come afterwards.
Leo Caesius
Banned
You folks seem to be forgetting that the media was attacked by terrorists. NBC, CBS, and ABC each received letters containing deadly forms of anthrax in 2001, starting about seven days after 9/11. The letter sent to NBC was addressed specifically to Tom Brokaw. A number of Democratic congressmen also received letters containing anthrax at the same time. Twenty-three people contracted the disease, and five people died.
The letters refer to Sept. 11th and also say "Allah is Great!", suggesting that al-Qaeda is behind the attack. However, letter attacks do not appear to be al-Qaeda's style.
The FBI is implicating a lone wacko (surprise, surprise!), but it's hard to imagine that a single person would have access to the kind of materials required to produce this type of anthrax. Furthermore, the anthrax inside the letters has been traced to a strain cultivated in US military laboratories.
The letters refer to Sept. 11th and also say "Allah is Great!", suggesting that al-Qaeda is behind the attack. However, letter attacks do not appear to be al-Qaeda's style.
The FBI is implicating a lone wacko (surprise, surprise!), but it's hard to imagine that a single person would have access to the kind of materials required to produce this type of anthrax. Furthermore, the anthrax inside the letters has been traced to a strain cultivated in US military laboratories.
Al Qaeda will never attack media directly, because they are publicity hounds. They want to be reported every time they launch a major attack, just to demonstrate the shock and horror of it to a wide audience.