Terrorist threat: Tempering grief with quiet determination

Click HERE
an interesting article about whether we are giving too much attention and coverage to terrorism, and in the process, playing right into the hands of the terrorists by creating panic and fear. After all, according to the article, Obama has said that more people died in the US each year by falling into their bathtubs than those who fall prey to terrorism. (this has BANGing potential!)

Note opening BANG of intro using a famous example n the past....

While it is all very justified for the media to create awareness over what is going on, esp when it threatens our lives, the very act of reporting it, or more specifically, THE WAY the media reports it (exaggerating, sensationalizing, or just intensive reporting) can result in more than just awareness....it can create paranoia and an overreaction on the part of the public. And we are not just talking about terrorist attacks, but SARs, bird flu, ebola, etc. At the crux of this problem over where to draw the line is the need for censorship. We do not want to cause a panic (which will make it difficult for the authorities to manage the problem), yet the people have the right to know what's happening, esp if it affects their life directly.
What caught my eye is this phrase "orgy of overheated coverage" in the media.

Note the use of comparison (with plane crash) when elaboration to make clear a point:

Yet none of this suggests that the current public response to terrorist attacks is inappropriate. To start with, it's human nature to pay more attention to a single incident in which a larger number of people are killed, rather than to many incidents in which single people perish: that's one reason why, say, a plane crash attracts more coverage than the grim but sadly routine carnage of road accidents.