posted on Jan, 7 2004 @ 04:56 AM
The news media has to reach the masses, the lowest common denominator.
Its the same with political speechs. Many politicians that I have worked with actually are pretty intelligent. However their speeches and political
campaigns make them look like idiots. However if they talked with intelligence, few would be able to follow.
As far as reporting the truth, there is much that the average person should not know. For example, grab a Physicians Desk Reference, give it to a
patient with a headache, give them an Rx. Give them 2 days to come back in with severe symptoms of a wierd side effect, only seen in members of the
opposite sex, but mentioned in the PDR in technical terms.
On a more contemporary note, there is little data on Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease and its relationship to eating wild game. Could it occur, possibly,
will it occur, very unlikely, should a hunter have to sort through tons of ovid data before getting a license? absolutely not. Should the news media
report a possible collaborating study in an obscure journal, probably not.
Now if the hunters friend dies a horrible death, and it is due to the extremely unlikly 1:100000000 chance, should he hunter know the details?
With the low probability, it is probably utterly impossible to link the incident anyhow.
However, if the hunter knew all of the details and blamed himself, he would have to deal with an insane amount of guilt for no reason. Thus he is
better off not knowing.
Of course, if the probability is in the 1;10 chance, then everyone should know.
Just another point of view