weblog | funny stuff | games | links | our book | subscribe

are you watching a war on TV?
News at 6pm. News at 7. 9. 10. 10:30. Midnight. Extended. Special report. In focus. Anyone would think there was a war on


"...on the trail of the lonesome pine"


Uh, ah, a new type of...of...m-missile...phwoaargh


only a matter of time

 

 
Is a short male defence correspondent talking with barely concealed masturbatory glee about a new type of "smart bomb" the US are using? Or a new type of devastating plane? Or some really beefy special forces working behind enemy lines?
Is that video of Osama Bin Laden on? Is he holding a cheap microphone that looks like it was picked up in Tandy for £9.99, thus giving the impression of a man more likely to break out into an impromptu kareoke rendition of "Loving You Is Easy Cos You're Beautiful" than pronouncing a smallpox jihad on Western Europe?
Is a correspondent reporting "LIVE! from the frontline" (i.e. cowering in the pitch black, shining a Maglite in his face and introducing - in 5 frames per second Realvideo jerkovision - better, daylight footage from Al Jezeera Arab TV)?
Has the jerkovision journalist failed to mention that he has paid the Northern Alliance to report from their frontline. The same brutal Northern Alliance cited for civilian massacres, bombings, summary executions and an arm-long list of human rights abuses?
Is the newsreader dismissing all information coming from the Taliban "not independently confirmed" while everything that comes from the Pentagon is swallowed whole without going through this stringent independent confirmation process?
Oh good. Now it's time for some hi-tech graphics explaining everything.
Is one studio reporter decorating his war campaign 'weather map' with glowing Osama-Bin-Laden icons while on the other channel his counterpart magicks a spinning 3D map of Afghanistan from the floor of some kind of Holodeck? Do you get the impression that the competing news shows appear to be trying to out Star Trek each other?
Does the broadcast seem to contain staggering amounts of operational data? Do the Taleban simply have to watch the 6 o'clock news to find out what's going to be bombed next?
Over to the US. Is a Pentagon representative only very grudgingly admitting that an off-target smart bomb caused civilian causalities? Then does he rapidly start reminding everyone that over 6000 Americans died in the World Trade Centre as if that makes it all right.
Is an analyst breathlessly interpreting the appearance of a new type of US plane as the beginnings of a new phase in the conflict? But doesn't it seem like this new phase has been happening since the beginning of the old first phase? Or is this all just a transitional phase before the next phase begins?
Are the losses of tens of thousands of jobs in the manufacturing sector, the
serial rape of dozens of women in the Lincolnshire area, and the devaluation
of the pound, all shunted to the Panda-shags slot at the end of the news?
As the credits roll, and the ominous music bongs away, do you feel completely disconnected from the bombings in Afghanistan, starving refugees, growing Muslim discontent with the West, and the actions of the war-mongering government you voted for?

written by David McCandless & Rhodri Marsden
more funny stuff
seethru weblog
newsletter
sign up for weekly(ish) send out
what's new
funny stuff
bullies reunited
a new site from the makers of friends reunited (not)
are you a lesbian?
you never know - you wake up one morning and...
accidental hedonist
the online life quest you control (or something)
more funny stuff
ticklists
time wasting games
the helicopter game
the most addictive game on the web - or your money back
side projects

weblog | funny stuff | games | links | contact | subscribe