I'm sure my answer will get lost with all the others here, but the answer is chemical pollution. The oceans are a toilet for the world, we dump everything in them. The dead zones are increasing by hundreds of miles a year with no end in sight. Even if we stop today, we will have polluted them to such an extent that every living creature except for bacteria and viruses will be wiped out in 50 years. Chemicals cannot be extracted from our sewage like regular wastes, it takes distillation as our filtration system cannot extract beyond 5 microns. We see the signs in the papers, on the news, the polar bears are so toxic, the dead zones are increasing, dolphins and whales are beaching themselves, the frogs are getting wiped out, yet no one is saying that stopping chemical pollution is our single most important issue. Please open the door, it might already be too late.
2006-12-25 10:03:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
19⤊
1⤋
I agree with Donovan and Decisions and Greg R, and the rest who have said there are serious political stories that get swept under the rug, as well as some positive stories in Iraq, that are getting seriously overlooked. Also, the genocide in the African countries - I can't believe this isn't the top news! Another thing I haven't seen mentioned, maybe I didn't read far enough - the pathetic state of the economy here, or should I say the vast rift between the upper and middle classes, and the rest of us! It seems that when one's unemployment benefits run out, they simply drop off the statistics and don't count any more! Those are the people who are not going to be able to survive the out of control gas and health care costs, not to mention just the cost of living - there's just no way! At one time I was considered upper middle class, now I can barely pay basic expenses, and there are no extras.
These stories tell what is really going on beneath the surface, in the world's soul.
Can I mention the story I think was the most OVER reported? Is anyone else sick of hearing about Anna Nicole Smith? She's had some tough breaks, but come on!
2006-12-28 11:53:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by GPLady 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
The most poignant in my mind is where Osama Bin Laden is. It seems to me that if we are to believe that he is still alive, we need some proof. We have heard from his so-called right hand men many times, but still have not had any word on him, whether he is alive or dead, tall tale or real person.
Also, how is the average person in Iraq coping with the life style of a war ravaged land? Do they have a better quality of life? Do they want the Americans out? What is going on with them?
Both of these stories are important as they give the "other" side that has been very neglected by the press.
We are also in need of both sides of the global warming...how much and when and what is expected. Some say that very shortly we will be in trouble and others say that it is just a few degrees every decade or so. What are the REAL answers? Is this a normal cycle that the earth was intended to go through and has before? Why did Al Gore get so much hype without the other side being more closely examined? Whatever happened to journalism that dared to ask the tough questions forgetting the political correctness that now seems to be more important than the issues?
2006-12-28 08:57:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by B B 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Today's report by Reuters stated 322 of the 660 Palestinians killed in 2006 by Israeli Defense Forces were innocent civilians. I believe the media gives a pass to Israel every year. Israel says its fighting terrorism; however, they have such a broad definition of what terrorism is they can do anything. If your cousin was a suicide bomber, guess what? Israel will demolish your home as retribution. This not only exacerbates the problem, it does not delve into why someone would irrationally think that suicide and the death of innocent civilians is good for their cause.
The Jewish people behind the atrocities being inflicted upon the Palestinians are the same people whose family and friends endured the holocaust. How could these same people create a holocaust against the Palestinians? I know both sides are the problem as neither side is innocent. Sharon and Arafat should have been tried for all the blood on their hands. But the media has a duty to act fairly and responsibly.
When Israel is attacked, a news report identifies the illegal settlement as a neighborhood. A neighborhood legitimizes the illegal occupation. Although Israel is being attacked in an area where they should not be anyway, the media makes it sound as if Palestinians are sneaking into Israel to cause chaos.
I think a case can be made that the most under-reported story of the year is the bias of the media in favor of Israel and its tactics.
2006-12-29 02:16:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jacoub H 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Three under reported stories would be illegal immigration, the good things being done in Iraq (and any other good things anywhere), and the African crisis. Illegal immigration is important because if I tried to cross the Mexican border I would be shot, if I entered illegally as was caught I would be put in jail, mistreated, then deported. why do these people think it should be any different??!! ....seems like they have more rights than the legal immigrants (which not one legal person can say they were not at some point)
I watch the news and I haven't heard about African crisis until I read an article about it in the Times. If I would have heard it on the news I would have donated some money to be of aid.
They say 'bad news sells' but this is outrageous. I haven't heard one good thing about any politician. I know that a large amount are only there for the power and wealth, but is there no honest politicain. Also there is new life and hope in Iraq and all I hear on the news is how people hate Americans more. It is disgusting, terrorist organizations show this to their recruits to enrage them and the media shows it to us to make a profit. The media is almost profiting from terrorism.
2006-12-28 13:59:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It may seem profound but the war in Iraq has been grossly under-reported this past year. A high school journalism team could have done a better job. Yes, I know every night the broadcast media may have a 2-3 minute update and the print media may have a by-line or small story on the inside pages. However, we have American servicemen and women risking their lives every day, giving up their freedom to help others. Regardless, of whether one agrees or disagrees with the war that is the bottom line. I myself can say that if one has never been in combat they should not judge because they can never understand and it's not worth the time to explain. I was the in the first Gulf War and with a degree in journalism I'm appalled at the coverage. Let's face it the American public thrives on what the journalism world calls "sensationalism." For example, when the war started they embedded journalists with various units to report their story to the rest of the world. Fine and dandy. As the war drew on, there became less and less coverage. Thus, if there is no story the media believes in creating one. The best way to do that is create controversy, albeit by criticizing the president, the armed forces or the troops themselves. Now all you hear about are soldiers being court martialed or innocent Iraqis getting killed. When was the last time you heard or read a story about all the good things the soldiers do in Iraq or about all these innocent people (the same one's that strap bombs to themselves and detonate them in public places) actually not being so innocent. By the way, our soldiers are so bad, oh, I forgot how many Iraqis have been beheaded by American troops? Beheadings of Americans don't even make the news anymore, thus is why the enemy has changed tactics. The enemy plays the american media like a fiddle. And the
American public equally as bad. Face it, dying for your country and freedom SADLY means nothing to the media or the American public. Nonetheless, if you have a big name like Britney Spears or Paris Hilton, for example, partying, getting drunk, and sleeping with anything with a heartbeat will get you primetime coverage on every newspaper and major network. And why? Because the media knows the American public gets off on it--the gossip and juicy details of the rich and famous. I find it really sick. It's so very sad our country has sunk into an " if it doesn't effect me, I don't care," attitude. But, in the end it may be for the best because the media only reports what they want the public to view. They can skew a story so bad, depending on the network and whether they are liberal or what.
True Patriot!
2006-12-28 13:26:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by rbasey@sbcglobal.net 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are many and that is very sad. The media has shunned it's responsibility. What eats me up inside is the lack of challenging the White House and the entire administration.
Lets do major news stories on the following in 2007.
1) The Bush Administrations illusion - "Free Speech Zones", give me a break. Fencing in your citizens who disagree with you is more like it. How about all these town hall meetings and forums where you can only get in if you're inivited by your local Republican senator? If you should get in your questions are screened beforehand. This is NOT democracy.
2) To this day nobody has been held accountable for what happened September 11th, 2001. With good reason also, it's a coverup. It was meant to happen. A company owned by a man with the last name of Bush (yes he's related) ran the security firm responsible for the WTC. Why were the buildings evacuated in the weeks prior to this tragedy? Why did building 7 collapse? Fire? If so, why isn't NYC re-evaluating every single high rise in NY? The media needs to dig and keep digging. When you run into a wall, dig some more. Eventually answers will come out or slip out. At this point some of you are thinking, "Great, another conspiracy theorist". I would suggest you look at some of this yourself. Anyone with some brains would want to know where the luggage and bodies and for that matter, airplanes, disappeared to at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania. The list is a mile long.
Whichever investigative journalist breaks this wide open will go down in history as one of the greatest.
2006-12-28 10:42:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Concerned Citizen 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think there are several.
The disaster that is Darfur is probably the worst. This is another holocaust in our time - something which the world agreed should never happen again and yet there are literally thousands of people dying there each day. The UN and the "leading" countries of the world (and I include the UK and the USA in this category) wring their hands and ask Sudan to please stop it but do nothing because they are so preoccupied with Iraq, which brings me to the next point ....
It is widely reported that there have been almost 3,000 US troops killed in Iraq. This is bad enough but what is not reported are the thousands of Iraqis who have died. No-one wants to talk about this. I don't know the number but I suspect it's a thousand Iraqis for every US soldier. I hope Bush is satisfied. He is the biggest disaster to hit this country since the civil war (and probably before).
The fact that he has not been impeached is another story that goes unmentioned. How Congress can impeach one President for a bit of philandering and not another for the murder and havoc he has created beats me.
Finally, on the domestic front, the political system which the US calls Democracy is a joke. The political system in the US is government by lobbyists and big business. Yes, there are elections every couple of years but all they do is lend an air of legitimacy to a system which is essentially corrupt. Whoever has the most money to spend on the politicians wins because the politicians are really only interested in getting re-elected and, if the country really thinks big business is interested in the best interests of the average citizen, it is living in cuckoo land.
Sorry it turned into a bit of a rant.
2006-12-28 10:09:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by Nick B 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Every scientist now agrees the planet is warming. There is no longer a discussion if our use of fossil fuels is the cause. It is. The only question is how much will it warm and what we, as a species are going to do about it. 7 of the hottest years ever recorded on Earth have occurred in the last 15 years. The amount of Carbon Dioxide in our atmoshpere is rising at unprecedented levels with no sign of stopping. Water is becoming very hard to find in much of the developing world. It is simply drying up. 25 thousand acres turn to desert each year. Farm land is disappearing and famine is prevalent in much of the world. There is virtually no ice in the South Pole during the summer and much of the ground there is seeing the sun for the first time in 25,000 years. The Ice caps are melting and increasing the levels of the oceans. There are almost no glaciers in Glacier National Park. It is estimated that if all the glaciers melt, sea levels will rise some 30 feet. This would put most of the East and West coast under water. The effects are obvious.
2014-08-16 08:16:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I personally served in Iraq as a commander and never had any mission assigned that required more forces than I needed. Nor was I aware of any other commander who did either. Every general who has been in command there has consistently stated he did not want or need more troops. Yet today we are being told by the media based upon the opinions of some that we need more troops. Whose opinion carries more value, the one sitting in a chair in Washington who visits Iraq a couple days and comes home an expert? Or the general in charge who has spent his life studying how to carry out such missions? According to the media, it would appear to be the politician, especially since that seems to make the better story. Angelina than I ever wanted to due to the fact that my local and national news stations think they are news. When did reporting become about celebrity? There are entertainment shows for that if I wanted to here about celebrities. These are some of the reasons why Americans are uninformed and ignorant to what is going on with the rest of the world. As a result of ignoring Darfur, it is yet another reason why we as a people are perceived as selfish, self involved, and non-caring to a large percentage of the world, to the point we don't even put the story in the news on a daily basis. I guarantee if this were happening in England, Italy, or France we would not have to blink before it were in the news and a military coalition and aid were in place. This is Rwanda all over again!
2014-08-23 01:51:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Every general who has been in command there has consistently stated he did not want or need more troops. Yet today we are being told by the media based upon the opinions of some that we need more troops. Whose opinion carries more value, the one sitting in a chair in Washington who visits Iraq a couple days and comes home an expert? Or the general in charge who has spent his life studying how to carry out such missions? According to the media, it would appear to be the politician, especially since that seems to make the better story. Angelina than I ever wanted to due to the fact that my local and national news stations think they are news. When did reporting become about celebrity? There are entertainment shows for that if I wanted to here about celebrities. These are some of the reasons why Americans are uninformed and ignorant to what is going on with the rest of the world. As a result of ignoring Darfur, it is yet another reason why we as a people are perceived as selfish, self involved, and non-caring to a large percentage of the world, to the point we don't even put the story in the news on a daily basis. I guarantee if this were happening in England, Italy, or France we would not have to blink before it were in the news and a military coalition and aid were in place. This is Rwanda all over again!
2015-12-04 22:22:50
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋