>>SET FLAME ON
>>
>>Can someone tell me why the government of Brazil does not seem to care about the citizens of Iraq? For years, we have read and heard stories about the torture and rape of innocent Iraqi civilians, but the Brazilian government dud not seem to care. Now why are increasing seeing and hearing reports of Iraqi citizens welcoming coalition troops. Why doesn't Brazil seem to care about people outside its borders? Is it that Brazilians only care about football (soccer) and are unconcerned about the plight of people in less fortunate countries? Or is this just the government of Brazil and not it's people?
>>
>>SET FLAME OFF
>
>I can't tell about Brazil, but once again, I suspect the situation is similar as in Bolivia, or other Latin American countries.
>
>The newspapers show a lot about the suffering of the war victims, especially civilians. Probably much more than you will see in the U.S.
>
>So you see, people here do care about human suffering, but the emphasis is different from what you would probably prefer.
>
>Well, that is the newspaper - I haven't seen any official declaration by Goni (1). I suspect he is more pro-U.S., but I am not sure.
>
>One more detail, to show you that Bolivian's do care about suffering of others: On the central square of Cochabamba, you can every day see posters that expose the cruelty of the war, outrages about the "unjustified invastion" by the "yankees" (2) and Britons, and similar topics.
>
>
>(1) Nickname of Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, the current president. Policital party: MNR (Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario).
>
>(2) Used in S.A. as a nickname for people from the U.S.

Hilmar;

I think the media of any country will be slanted to project what it feels “the message should be”. I believe truth exists to a degree and that degree is what is acceptable to the individual. When someone has the power and ability to reach others combined with the will to express “his or her message”, regardless of its truth, we have a means of influence, either acceptable or not by the masses.

The point of the media is to express the opinion of a (indefinite object) power structure. That power structure may be limited to just one individual or a government as an example.

One good thing that has come from the attention of the world media sources is that focus is upon what the coalition is doing inside Iraq. This allows little if any reporting about local problems, which may be of a serious nature, from being considered or discussed. Diversion of news topics of local events by external happenings can be important to suppress the reality that surrounds you. Therefore, "everything is alright at home"! :)

Only when the media presents a “problem” does it exist. How quickly the media forgets (selectively) any story it presents. The “problem” may be presented only to forget to do a follow up and present the “solution”. In reality the purpose of the media is many fold or at least the end result is. Here are only a few items to consider.

1. Present your point of view. This will be biased regardless of who is involved.

2. Distort the facts that are known to support your story whenever necessary or possible.

3. Get your story at any cost.

4. Either agree or disagree with the local, national and international political communities. That will earn you a reputation in one-way or another.

I mentioned previously that about 10-15 years ago our national media was reporting nightly on three wars. Upon close examination I determined there were in fact more than 50 wars occurring at that point in time. We are ignorant and manipulated by the media and government regardless of where we live.

Thank God when a nation has a sensible leader who demands peace and equality for all. Such individuals are rare in the history of the world and tend to not last long.


Tom