The media seem to love these terrorist attacks.

[Ron Green]

They run non-stop cell phone video on half the screen while breathless anchor people alternate with "experts" on the other half. The constant underlying message is that we must trust more and more of our world to "security professionals" as our fears are assuaged by the products and services in the intervening commercials.

DISCLOSURE: I'm on the road, visiting my daughter who has many channels of TV. I have NO television, so I'm unfamiliar with what's on the screen from day to day. But it seems to me the M$M are perfectly oiled and adjusted to give us a warmonger for President.

[cwydro]

1. If it bleeds, it leads.

Always has been so.

[Whiskeytide]

2. True. But not really surprising. It drives...

... ratings and fosters a sense of importance. Kind of like meteorologists loving a good hurricane.

I think the individuals themselves abhor the acts. But the news organizations love the ratings, and the segments are set up with that in mind.

[Ron Green]

6. It doesn't bode well for the MUCH more important message

championed by Bernie Sanders and others that we need a genuine and fundamental change of direction, a new political economy. All that's needed to derail the necessary effort are a couple of bombs and the media.

[WDIM]

3. M$M gets its ratings from sensationalism

Any disaster is exploited for ratings and that means profits.

[Ron Green]

7. The attention span is being cut to shreds.

The screen is split by default, with a crawl across the bottom. Context is gone.

I do believe we're screwed.

[KansDem]

4. Why not? They loved W and these attacks are his legacy.

It follows then that they love these terrorist attacks.

[left-of-center2012]

5. Otherwise it's Trump 24/7 n/t

[left-of-center2012]

8. Split screen with Obama's speech

MSNBC and CNN are broadcasting live President Obama's speech to the Cuban people.
The screen is spit to show pictures from Brussels, Obama getting a smaller portion.
FOX isn't showing Obama.

[Quantess]

9. Terror attacks on the other side of the world are for encouraing Americans to vote for a warmonger?

That's quite a stretch.

I highly doubt Belgians would come to that conclusion. I partially agree with you, but it's also a bit egocentric to focus on the American presidential election when a terror attack happens in Europe.

[Ilsa]

10. But the talking heads have already

attempted to link the attacks in Europe to refugees, porous borders, etc. It plays to the "Build a Wall!" group, and the attacks will scare just enough rational people to start thinking the "Build a wall" group is right.

They love inciting the hair-on-fire "Terror terror!" screamers.

[Quantess]

11. Yes, and similar conversations are being had in Europe.

I have a slightly different perspective, because I'm in Europe. For europeans, we get a similar creepy feeling when seeing Donald Trump's uncanny popularity among american voters, and we wonder how it will affect attitudes in europe. That's my .02

[Surya Gayatri]

12. The CEOs are in hog heaven--rubbing their hands at the ad revenue from all

those terrified rubes, tuning in to get their "fear fix".