Mixed messages: Wired in two minds over Estonian “cyberwar” story
For me, the most interesting thing to come out of the so-called cyberwar DDoS attack on Estonia back in May this year is the different ways that different media have approached the story. Nowhere is this more obvious than with Wired; the magazine ran a long and beautifully written piece that completely overstates the issues for the sake of sensationalist warnings about potential risks to the US, while blogger Kevin Poulson cheerfully dissects and deflates all the hyperbole while sitting in an office at the same company headquarters.
Of course, I’m not suggesting that bloggers are inherently less prone to sensationalising a subject … but I’m increasingly finding the web is a better news source, precisely because I can get a broad selection of angles on a story with ease. How about you?
August 27th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
I agree. I don’t read newspapers or watch TV for the news, I rely almost completely on the Internet to try and work out what’s happening on the international and political stage.
Australian media is so tame, and so AP based and pro-US (perhaps terrified of being even slightly critical of the US), that it’s usefulness is only to headline the issues, as there’s bugger all analysis.
August 28th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Thanks for the comment, James … though I’m not sure you guys down under have any monopoly on timid media. Even the BBC are becoming increasingly reactionary and tabloid-esque.