I know it must be quite scary to be in the center of a riot and not really know what will happen next but let's ask ourselves the true question, why was he there?
Is Dan Rivers there to be dramatic and help the ratings for CNN by sensationalizing the reports? Or is he there to give a factual report of a political situation that has erupted in to public unrest?
There are many facts that he left out or sensationalized this weekend. Here are two that were favorites of mine that stuck with me:
- He reported that the Army was firing AK-47 rifles into the air and at the crowd of demonstrators. The Army actually used blanks or "paper" bullets - he forgot that little point.
- He used the term Molotov Cocktail Bombs repeatedly in his segments, sounds so much more dramatic than gasoline bombs, the term used by the BBC and ABC.
I understand if you are on the street and start to hear the sound of machine gun fire, that would unnerve the most experienced of reporters, with the exception of Dan Rather maybe. But unlike the BBC and ABC (Australian Broadcast Corp) who actually reported that they were firing blanks, Dan the man kept reporting about the gun fire, leaving the blanks part out. Didn't the lack of bloodshed and lack of dead bodies on the street raise a question in his mind? Maybe he thought we wouldn't ask that question.
The BBC and ABC reporters, who were also located amongst the chaos, were factual and not over dramatizing the situation; I give them both a lot of credit. Dan on the other hand, not so much.
On another note, Dan who is ever diligent in the pursuit of sensational journalism, gave the impression to the world that the entire city was under siege while clearly mentioned by the BBC and ABC, in the rest of the city, outside of the government house areas, the Thai people were celebrating the Songkarn New Year water festival. Making their only New Year wish that the world see Thailand as a peaceful nation so that life can get back to normal for everyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment