Accuracy in Media

[--Pete]

Hi,

There was a ridiculous story on CNN recently about China considering a visit to the moon. No, that's not the ridiculous part.

Yes it is (although the flag screw up is pretty good, too). Putting a man on the moon is a political dog and pony show. And that it had already been done half a century before the Chinese project will come to fruition makes its purpose moot.

Now, building a scientific and engineering colony on the moon, that would be a worth while goal. Using the mass of the moon to build an environment were reasonable shielding from radiation is possible. Using the reduced gravity to build space probes, telescopes, etc., easier than on Earth. And taking advantage of the lower (1/6th IIRC) gravitational curb to stage and launch more payload on missions would make planetary exploration (and, eventually, colonization) a real possibility.

But to send a 'visitor' to the moon to get some form of international recognition for their technical prowess? Now that's funny. And a stupid waste of resources. Just as it was when we did it.

Back on topic; the dozen or so times that I've been involved or at the scene when something was recorded have a perfect average. Zero percent accuracy. From discussions with others, this is common. And yet people still buy newspapers, listen to radio, and watch TV news. Why? You start out ignorant, then the media misinforms you. You then know less than you knew before. Freedom of the press? They're out to educate and inform? Give me a break. The only freedom the press seems to want is the freedom to #$%& up.

--Pete