This Just In: Rolling UK News Thread

Though I guess I did see some people say, for instance during the Sandy Hook shooting, that we shouldn't reward murderers with the attention that they craved. I don't know. That just seems silly to me.

I think, and I don't mean any disrespect to you Caek for I <3 you, but if "rolling", developping news isn't ypur thing, seeing you call yourself "incurious", then maybe developping news cycles/thread like these might not be for you?

I got a prurient fascination, i'd say most ppl do, what's wrong with that? It's one level of interest. Add a dash of mystery (what's going on here?), topical political/social interest, the fact that this pretty much unfolded in front of and for media/public consumption, i don't know what ~isnt~ fascinating about this. It's p much why rolling news exists, realtime drama of wide interest. If this thread is to be a discussion of the wheres and whyfores of rolling news, then the case against is far better made on a day where its a fuckin loop of idk pippas arse.

Mordy:

1. I'm demonstrably in a minority. TV news and papers don't do this kind of coverage because it hurts their profits.

2. Maybe theres some truth the idea that the equivalent liberal elite in Britain is less comfortable with prurience/vulgarity in current affairs than the US, ok, but you're kidding yourself if you think the US media is in most ways more robust and more curious than the British, or that the quality of middlebrow current affairs is worse in the UK (eg CNN vs BBC). You can make a case that the analysis in something like the nyt is deeper and more sophisticated than say the guardian, or that the deep throat expensive investigative stuff is stronger in the US, but the day to day reporting, ie just the stuff I'm complaining about here, is not lacking in the UK in amount or in popularity. Again, if you think this is due to some fundamentally docile decadent europeanness, i would point out that US newspapers won't print swear words in direct quotes.

I mean tbrr i want to discuss this particular attack with ilx- deliberate targeting of a soldier, no interest in general public except as witness, p obv intent on public suicide by cop afterwards. Is this new, what are the ramifications, is it to be preferred to eg suicide bomb attacks, should one even ask if things like this are 'to be preferred' vs each other, why not, etc

Instead its ppl grousing that the new news is rubbish and shows too much news to boot

I was calling myself incurious sarcastically LBI.

deems otfm

Caek is the meaner of the piranha bros iirc

Go ahead and discuss it. I derailed and then apologised and mordy asked for our takes but no one had any takes so I kept going. Over to you.

Heh ok, consider that shit above asked

putting aside its veracity, this guy definitely believed that islam is at war with the west - or at least with the uk

do you guys think cameron will be able to effectively exploit this to prosecute the 'war on terror'?

This has more implications for domestic policy than anything else.

At what point can the media stop saying "alleged attackers"? Using the word 'alleged' just seems absurd in this case. The attack was carried out in broad daylight in front of plenty of witnesses and they then hung around waiting for the police to come while asking everyone to film them and broadcast their message about why they had done it while they waved the weapons around and were literally red-handed.

cameron has proven unable to effectively exploit or prosecute anything thus far, so this is unlikely to be anything other than a gruesome and unedifying clusterfuck imho.

do you guys think cameron will be able to effectively exploit this to prosecute the 'war on terror'?

By doing what? I don't get the sense that he would actually want to

I don't think it diminishes the horror (or even newsworthyness) of the event to say that there's possibly not a lot to be "curious" about at the moment. We know a tiny number of people would feel justified in attacking soldiers. We know a hopefully equally tiny number of people would try to burn down a mosque on the flimsiest of pretexts. As shocking as this is, it doesn't really tell us anything new or point to an obvious future political / social shift, other than slight hardening of racist attitudes in the short term.

the unquestioning use of the word "terrorism" is so infuriating. that word has never been used about eg the EDL's acts of violence.

Also, initial reports described the assailants as 'wearing Muslim dress'. Nick Robinson passed on the info without checking, and then had to turn around and say that description came from Whitehall. Fuckers.

That's the REAL outrage here ppl

TBF Theresa May does suck Satan's cock in hell, so I'm not exactly surprised she'd be at the helm of a clusterfuck.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22624100

Assuming that this turns out to be definitely an attack on a soldier, then the warning signs that it would happen can be found in the heart of al-Qaeda's violent ideology and how that has been interpreted by followers in the UK and other Western nations.

this guy blowing nult out of the water.

Ha I actually thought that was a pretty good piece by the standards of the bbc website.

yeah not a bad piece i guess, just a really awful sentence.

@edfenergy is the hot feed rn

other than slight hardening of racist attitudes in the short term

A change of direction too. Up to now most of your anti-Muslim racists thought they just hated brown South Asians - now they can widen the scope to black Africans.

I always think COBRA sounds like a cool intelligence organisation then I remember it's the name of where the meetings are held - Cabinet Office Briefing Room A.

Mum talked down Woolwich terrorists who told her: 'We want to start a war in London tonight'

Mum who is an immigrant btw

John Reid reappeared yesterday to bang on about the need for the government to increasingly monitor internet traffic, Skype, etc. Like how on earth would that prevent two nutters hacking someone to death with a machete? It's hardly a complex logistical operation.

she obviously showed bravery, or whatever it is to tell off a psychopath, but the weirdly patronising/worthy canonisation of heroes from violent or tragic events is really cloying and irritating.

xpost

Some sites are naming the killer who spoke on the video clip as a 20-year-old British Nigerian who had converted to Islam and had recently been preaching in the streets in Woolwich.

I don't think it diminishes the horror (or even newsworthyness) of the event to say that there's possibly not a lot to be "curious" about at the moment. We know a tiny number of people would feel justified in attacking soldiers. We know a hopefully equally tiny number of people would try to burn down a mosque on the flimsiest of pretexts. As shocking as this is, it doesn't really tell us anything new or point to an obvious future political / social shift, other than slight hardening of racist attitudes in the short term.

― хуто-хуторянка (ShariVari), Thursday, 23 May 2013 08:35 (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

a big bag of OTM

Some sites are naming the killer who spoke on the video clip as a 20-year-old British Nigerian who had converted to Islam and had recently been preaching in the streets in Woolwich.

Oh great. So, that's every street preacher on every town/city centre becoming the new attack-point, as opposed to being ignored and walked past, right?

she obviously showed bravery, or whatever it is to tell off a psychopath, but the weirdly patronising/worthy canonisation of heroes from violent or tragic events is really cloying and irritating.

xpost

― ... (LocalGarda), Thursday, May 23, 2013 10:53 AM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

could be worse...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/941975_435525179877046_272048128_n.jpg

I didn't mean to imply that you should have some particularly prurient fascination but that this is of legitimate interest and is a notable event and I think in the United States people are very drawn to examining/understanding these events.

I'll give you the first but not the second. Which is also why I feel LBI is being disingenuous about "All news is rolling" - the this-just-in impression of rolling news (which Woolwich ironically really isn't at this stage?) gives everything the sheen of "We just heard this, it might be relevant, or it might not, who knows" and cuts off the chance to sit down and say "Here are the things we actually know and here's what we think about what we know" - in the time it takes to organise that, a competing news source may have newer fresher info from the entrails of a raven or something.

cameron has proven unable to effectively exploit or prosecute anything thus far

― media conglomerates are pedaling the same product (stevie), Thursday, May 23, 2013 8:08 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm. first time i've been glad cameron is prime minister and the govt is the present coalition.

"The bus then started to move away. They dropped us in the middle of Lewisham which really annoyed me because I had no idea how to get from there to Parliament Square."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/22/woolwich-first-person-account

the this-just-in impression of rolling news (which Woolwich ironically really isn't at this stage?) gives everything the sheen of "We just heard this, it might be relevant, or it might not, who knows" and cuts off the chance to sit down and say "Here are the things we actually know and here's what we think about what we know" - in the time it takes to organise that, a competing news source may have newer fresher info from the entrails of a raven or something

hmm, i'm not sure - in my experience of being sacked out in front of BBC news 24, unable to turn it off although I know it should, it tends to spend a lot of time reiterating "here are the things we actually know". But you're right I think about the overall effect of rolling news, the sense that this-just-in imparts which is that NEW INFORMATION IS CONSTANTLY COMING IN NEW THINGS ARE HAPPENING STAY TUNED when in fact nothing new is, neither information nor analysis, so as a viewer you're hyped up and held waiting and generally in an unhealthy place.

David Cameron @David_Cameron
I will be making a statement shortly. One of the best ways to defeat terrorism is to go about our normal lives
11:28 AM - 23 May 2013

that guy does the worst tweets

some weird cameron's top tips shit in that second sentence

Shocking knowledge of South London transport there xxxxp

She wants to get a train from Lewisham to Charing Cross really, way quicker than the bus.

Shoddy treatment of our heroes nonetheless.

One of the best ways to defeat terrorism is to MAJOR PM STATEMENT ABOUT TERRORISM IMMINENT

xp-to-self

I mean, there are new forms that conspiracy theory is taking right now which are so clearly linked to the this-just-in rolling-news model: the ones that see the way news information changes as facts are ascertained as evidence that some authority figure is controlling the story.

the effect that this-just-in news has, which is to say the viewer's feeling that rolling news is a news event happening in real time, conflicts with what is actually happening on this-just-in news, which is that the news gathering is happening in real time. This-just-in news turns the process of newsgathering into the news story-- so of course people's imaginations jump on it and make this news story even more of a story by making it conspiratorial.

One of the best ways to defeat terrorism is to go about our normal lives

it's nice to know i'm defeating terrorism 24/7

Isnt that broadly correct tbh

Oh great. So, that's every street preacher on every town/city centre becoming the new attack-point, as opposed to being ignored and walked past, right?

Some worried men:
http://www.addictmusic.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/manic-street-preachers.jpg

what, that working your 9-5 and eating your vegetables won't blow anything up? i reckon so yeah.

xpost