So it's okay to effectively condone mass shooting, on a national TV network, causing more pain for relatives of the victims involved, but playing a widdle ol' video game in your bedroom on your own makes you evil?

Talk about hypocrisy...

"I’m a free speech absolutist, but I think that at the same time, we have to have free speech in some kind of a context."

Am I right in taking this to mean: "I believe in free speech so long as it's restricted"?

Sorry for the double post

"We showed how dark he was, and what the reality is. And it put a lot of campuses in this country on alert. And it’s changed…"

BULLSHIT

NOTHING has changed on campuses. You might get a text message saying there is a crazy loose on campus, however any amount of planning by the person can make that warning useless.

Colleges are no more alert, they just gave us one more illusion of safety.

I'm dissapointed with you Mr. Brokaw, but I still think you are a great news caster.

"Oh yes, i believe in free speech. As long as it's MY free speech. Because i'm more important and older than you."

I can see why you retired, Mr. Brokaw...

Brokaw is an idiot. He claims to be for free speech but then goes on to say that blogs should not exist. Basically what he means that you need to be a news outlet before expressing your opinion. He means that ordinary people should not have a public voice.

I agree with chris here. Brokaw is a hypocrite.

I agree that airing the videos of Cho was the worst thing that any news outlet can do. It basically immortalized him and his crime. The news should not give the air time to loons and their loonie videos as that does inspire more loons to follow suit. 15 minutes of fame. Yeah right.

@ Cheeselikescereal

He's a great newscaster? He just proved that he is an apathetic hypocrite. Your still going to let him have some form of validity.

"So is he saying that it’s ok to show violence but not ok to talk about it?"

No, he's saying it's okay to talk about violence, as long as it's through major media outlets.

He doesn't like the fact that Blogs are doing the news reporting these days, and doing a much better job at it too.

"TB: I think it’s not just television. What I said earlier is what we ought to be addressing, the whole fabric of the place of violence in our society…"

Yeah, as long as it isn't addressing the incompetence of NBC and their news team who decides to show this crap.

Tom Brokaw is a legend...but he is dead wrong here.

stupid.......

This guy above me is a idiot.........and so is this guy that the article is about.

If I'm not for restricting the right of game publishers to distribute an ultra-violent video game, I can't be against the news media saying it's alright for them to put up video of an ultra-violent figure right before a massacre. That'd make me (and anyone here who supports distribution of media regardless of content [pornographic excluded]) a hypocrite.

We either:
1. Believe that media does affect people regardless of content and should be restricted by parents/ourselves.

2. Believe that media does affect people and should (to some extent) be restricted by the government.

3. Or we want some media to be restricted because we think it's bad and not for others and have the high road to be hypocrites and sleep well at night.

Brokaw is doing just that, but it seems some of the comments here point towards that as well.

So you can pick me apart... I think it's completely irresponsible for news outlets to show videos such as the VT Shooter. Also, I think it's completely irresponsible for R* and T2 to release an ultra-violent videogame without significantly adjusting the content (not rendering mechanism to block such content). Both are very tasteless and in the lesser good for the community. Both are my opinion, but I don't think either should have been restricted from being distributed as-is and with whatever slant each distributor wanted to put on it.

[...] GamePolitics.com » Blog Archive » Tom Brokaw: Airing VA Tech Killer Videos Okay, But Blogs, Video Games “Cancerous” [...]

Brokaw is also the guy who has written several books glorifying WWII (which is of course nothing compared to the violence of blogs and videogames...) and thinks that those who fought in WWII are the "greatest generation" you know, except for all that pesky institutionalized racism and sexism that existed during WWII...
So basically what he is saying is, "These damn kids these day!"

i can't honestly say anything more eloquent than this: Fuck you Tom Brokaw.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding him, but I think Tom isn't suggesting video games create violence, I think he's suggesting that we need to examine the effects of violence in ALL media.. TV, Movies, Video Games, etc. And that's not a bad idea, we should be having that discussion as long as it's all-inclusive, and not just about pointing fingers. After all, our goal in these situations should be to figure out how to prevent it in the future while maintaining our free society, and not looking for a scapegoat. We have ourselves to blame for the violence in this society.

You have got to be kidding.

Showing that video absolutely was the wrong decision. How could anyone NOT realize that in validating Cho's explicit desire for posthumous publicity for his act, NBC basically said to all the potential shooters out there "if you're really willing to throw your life away in this manner as long as people know about it, we will provide the vehicle for it"?

It was utterly thoughtless and irresponsible. It's not even like they couldn't talk about it without showing the video; this was NOTHING but a ratings grab. Which I realize is the purpose of the television network, but fucking hell, guys, have some sense of social responsibility.

And then for Brokaw to have the GALL to say that "blogs and video games" are MORE harmful?! That doesn't even make sense! This isn't even "dating" himself, it's showing signs of severe senility or complete, utter, wanton disregard for any kind of personal responsibility in the name of covering his own (and NBC's) ass. Disgusting.

I love Hipocrites.. FUCKERS!

@lumi

*Punches lumi*

Feeling angry and murderous yet?

Blogs and video games? Despite the fact that dude in Finland was totally imitating Cho (oh but thats just their speculation, which is bad, and easily ignored as flawed, but it's alright to speculate about video game violence.) Or the fact Cho's roommates and classmates said he didn't play video games and thought that was strange.

It really is getting popular to blame video games for everything again. As for the blogs... he's just bitter that they're doing a better job than the mass media.

You either have free speech or you do not. There are no ifs, ands, or buts, no conditions, no prerequisites. Free speech is not a continuum or a spectrum.

Free speech is a simple yes or no, and Mr. Brokaw just said no.

Man, uninformed and hypocritical statements like this really raise my ill humors. It's basically a blatant attack at things he has no understanding about while defending something that was obviously wrong in an area where he does know what he's talking about.

Even with the fact that main stream news reporting has lost almost all its credibility, a blog still doesn't come anywhere near what the 10 o'clock news can do.

I'm not even gonna grace his video games statement with a response, since like airing the VT video, it lends some weight to his distorted view of the world.

It's hilarious how hypocritical these anti-videogame people are.

"(Then again, they wouldn’t stop talking about the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre yesterday, so I guess nobody’s got it perfect.)"

I think that's a little unfair though. They talked about it, it was the biggest tragedy in Montreal's history so it is a little normal, but to say they would'nt stop talking about it is a bit much. You should notice though that they never talk about the shooter anymore, he's barely mentionned. The media talked about the victims of the tragedy.

Well well Tom Brokaw knows who his masters are big media not the news not the truth not the people but big media....
just my ignore list with Rush(as in drugs),Brill'o(brillo its the gift that keeps giving),Hennity(as in banny hen), and various other fools who smoke the fumes from their own arse.
-----------------------
Steve
Wow.....reach much? Sorry he is not thinking deeply on this he is thinking only of the bottom line in ratings for his network, also society has always blamed media for its issues, also you can't do much abotu crazy people being crazy without marking and labeling people creating more outcasts and troubles.

The only way that it could be done is if businesses and schools have consolers in place to pull people from work/class/whatever and make sure they are treated, because this is a minor problem in the ocean of humanity none will take the time to create such a system.

next would making the mental health police...........meh.....I said it once I will say it again...theres not much you can do abut crazy people.

So this is a blog about video games? So what type of cancer is GP?

Ayway, he is ignoring the effect of mass media for his own form of income's benefit. This would be like Rockstar saying, "GTA has NO effect on kids!" Both are equally untrue.

Personally, I'm OK with NBC's running the video, because I'm tired of us Americans hiding from the oddballs, the poor, and pretending our existence isn't nasty, brutish, violent, and short. This is life people. Our first breath is searing, screaming pain, and likely so is our last. Once we've accepted this an unavoidable reality, we can make the most of the time we have.

But, you don't see me defending my use of mass media, and then calling out other forms of mass media for doing the EXACT SAME THING.

It's clear that blogs and videogames had better just GET THE HECK OFF TOM BROKAW'S LAWN!

Thomas: We can believe in a combination.

Videogames, as they are specifically purchased and brought into the home can be controlled by parents/ourselves. Our obtaining them is an active decision on our part. We look at the box, look at the ESRB rating, and (should) make a conscious choice as to whether to bring this into our home.

Media, on the other hand, especially broadcast media, does not give us this choice. We can choose to turn it on or off, but the content that comes into the home is not at the discretion of the individual. If I'm watching NBC because I like watching "Friends" and they come up with a news-flash about some violent killer, that is not my decision. If I am watching the news for some specific content (usually the "lifestyle" article they wind up putting on last) yet in their headlines they plaster some sort of graphic depiction of something, that's not done fairly. The newscaster may briefly mention "The following footage is graphic" a mere half-millisecond before they go into it, but even then, they do not provide any opportunity to know when it's finished. How do I know when it's safe to come back for the lifestyle story?

Beyond that, would you say that anybody who might be offended by some content on television should avoid changing channels? Because when I move from one channel to another, there's no warning that the channel I'm entering might be something against my sensibilities. Yes, I can turn away again, but that's not the point.

The point of this is to demonstrate that videogames and broadcast media are different. The former I make the decision to bring into my home. The latter comes whether I want it or not, and my ability to choose to avoid any exposure to certain things is decidedly limited barring not having the television on at all. For this reason, I don't think it's hypocritical to argue that it is appropriate that some forms of media, particularly broadcast media, should adhere to a stricter standard than other forms.

@MrSkid
Thats old media works these days; more shock, less substance.All that garbage to sell adult diapers and pills that give you hard ons.

Wow, we are destroying America! After posting this comment on a blog I might have to go play a video game or two now. I'm sure Tom will be at my door with a shovel soon enough...

What a hypocrite

And this is why I think hypocrisy should be outlawed.

This is known as stepping all over yourself. Brokaw, you are not an absolutist.

@Ken

1) Sadly, 90+% of guns used in violent shootings were obtained illegally.
2) Yes, there are reasons to own a gun besides shooting someone else. Namely hunting, sport, and self-defense.
3) It's the second amendment for a reason
4) He should have been in a mental house, but there was clearly something in his past that led up to this. People do not just flip out because they have a gun.
5) Yes it is easy. In fact, I know a guy on a street corner who could get you guns and ammo for under 20 bucks. But at a store? Not really.
6) Washington DC leads the nation in murders. They also have a complete ban on handguns.

@Shaesyco

That might very well be true. It could also be that people are by and large stupid, as said by Agent Kay from Men in Black. Hell, it could be something in the link below.
http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html
However, equating such things as a massacre to just one issue is stupid. Massacres are largely the result of the life experiences of the murderer coupled with whatever temperment they were born with. Each of the child's experiences are caused by said temperment coupled with the above mentioned factors for all of the individuals invovled. It isn't just "if there were no guns, this would be fixed" or "if he had gotten the proper help, it would be fixed". We don't really know why such tragedies happen in full. It is doubtful that we will ever see them go away for ever. All we can do is mourn for those lost.

@Catch 33

Surely, though, there was a better way to handle it. Maybe just putting it on their website and not reporting it.

@Dark Sovereign

This is something most people around the world, myself included, will never understand about the U.S. It's "gun culture". Looking at your points I can only disagree.

1) Most guns used in mass shootings were obtained legally. Not all the shooters owned the guns legally of course if they didnt a relative did.
2) Guns have a single use. To kill, it can be for hunting, self-defense, etc. but in the end, it's to kill.
3) The second amendment was made many many years ago. Then it was for a reason.
4) People who don't flip just because they have a gun but it's far too easy in the U.S. to get a gun when you flip out.
5) That's again a U.S. things. If guns weren't so readily available everywhere, store included, it would probably be harder to find a gun in a treet corner. I ilve in a city of 3 millions and not I nor anybody I know, knows where to find a gun.
6) The U.S. leads the world in murders. It's the one "civilized" country that doesn't have a nationwide ban or some sort of control on handguns.

argh, a gun for an edit button.

After reading those articles posted by Hokie,
Nugent: Gun-free zones are recipe for disaster - CNN http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/commentary.nugent/index.html
U.S. Gun Laws Draw Heat After Massacre - ABC http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3050071&CMP=OTC-RSSFeed...

You can see how it's night and day on the belief of the "gun culture" troughout the world.

"3) The second amendment was made many many years ago. Then it was for a reason."


Yes, and that reason was to keep a healthy fear of the people by the government. And I don't see how that is no longer relevant. Actually if anything it is MORE relevant.

Oh yeah, add-on to my comment (really, edit button):

It's also doubtful that anyone from another country could understand US culture in general. What you get outside of this nation is a great big mess of our loudest members, not a good view of the US in general. I could try to explain, but I don't know if I could get it across properly. Especially since there is no "US in general". Those murder rates don't just suddenly spring into being because we have guns. There are other factors out there, and what few people ever question is why people use those guns. Why would somebody feel compelled to take another's life? Stress seems the most likely answer, but that is a general term, and has many factors beneath it.

As someone who is at Virginia Tech, and was there when April 16th happened, the fact that Brokaw would defend NBC's decision to show that video shows me exactly what sort of low-class, ratings-pandering scum he is. It disrespected every member of the Virginia Tech community, family, and friends who were involved somehow, and his continuing defense shows how little he cares.

The interesting thing to see was the MASSIVE backlash which happened to the media outlets as a result of the tragedy. They kept pushing themselves into campus, and the students politely but strongly let them know that they were not wanted on campus during that time. The simple fact is, the media outlets are becoming outdated because they have such clear agendas. People don't trust them, and don't believe them, they way they used to.

@jkdjr25

I agree with you that there are thousands of responsible gun owners in the U.S. I didn't say there wasn't. What I meant is that I just don't understand the "gun culture" the U.S. has. To my mind, handguns have begun so widespread you almost need to have one to be safe in the U.S., that's the image I have at the moment. It's something very differend here in Canada. Something, having grown up in Canada, I cannot even begin to comprehend but it is something that I think americans must look at too, to understand what has happened and what the future of the country is. To me, it is an extremely complex issue. One I am glad we don't have in Canada.

@Hackangel

That's the thing, we don't need the handguns to be safe, but that doesn't mean that we want them gone. I don't own a handgun myself, but I wouldn't sacrifice the ability to own one just because somebody wants the illusion of safety. As I said before, Canada isn't where I was talking about when I said that guns are being smuggled in.

Let's not forget that NBC shown the videos filmed by Cho before he went on his selfish and compassion-lacking rampage. The videos that NBC shown might have sparked the false alarms at other schools, colleges, and universities across this nation that were put out by those who wanted their fifteen minuets of sick and self-centered fame. That is more poisonous than any Blog or any Video Game ever.

EZK: Sorry. I don't have access to this article at work, but this could not wait. Are you saying that NBC had the videos before Cho went on his killing spree? From what was reported he sent the package by post to NBC the day of the shooting.

... second amendment debate.

Walking the other way now... quickly.

Back to Brokaw... put down the cane grandpa, the kids are off your lawn. It's naptime. Just drink your juice and dream about days long past, where you actually meant something and had a shred of credibility to your name.

He is like a lot of the "older" generation in politics, fearing change and not believing anything new can be as good as what they used. Movies are safe, games are not, news networks are trustable, blogs are not.

That said, I yearn for a day when games are safe and those blasted holographic simulations are the thing that is cancerously destroying the youth of our nation! Now get off my lawn!

MR.B
oh I am ignoring the fundie talky heads for more reasons than whining about the game industry or how media brainwashes they like any good entertainer play to their audiences, for me most of what they say is pure one sided BS, Brokaw can make sense but is thumping his collective network chest, Olberman will take jabs at anythign in the news plus he can be as ill informed on things since again he knows what side his bread is buttered.

Also countdown like the talk head shows are more entertainment than news.

I can stand Keith and Glen beck, love Lou Dobbs the rest seem to be one trick phonies who try to hold onto their ratings beyond logic, reason and stability of their own opinions.

I mean I use to love Brill'o then about 4-6 years ago he just went OTT,I guess after that thing with the intern he got ugly, he was already crass in his bitterness and I loved him for telling it like it is..now he seems to be just a bitter creepy old white guy.............. like Bil Myer 0-o

Back to topic for a bit not many high level mainstream outlets have enough sense not to bash new media they need ratings before everything and need to fan the flames of viewer ship so they will report as they see fit whenever they can, politics only comes into play for more general mainstream things games seem to be fair game to both sides so they can pander for whatever they need.


Brokow is smart enough to see what he said was "failing" so that final bit about all media he tries to save his comments from rebuke, sorry either it is or it is not...
altho...he just mgiht be having a zippy day :P

zomg words!wat these?!?! *naw drool*
:P
LOL

I'm reminded of Roger Ebert's depressing story about the aftermath of a school shooting. A journalist asked if he thought violent movies contributed to this and possible future shootings. He said no, what really contributed to the possibility of more shootings was the news media's fetishization of the events, with days of wall-to-wall coverage, playing and replaying the survivors' stories and shouting from the rooftops every tiny detail of the killers' lives. The lesson the media was teaching, argued Ebert, was that this was a good route to immortality. Inevitably, his interview never aired.

And that is why, even though I greatly disagree with Ebert's stance on video games, I still admire him.

@Zippy
I knew what you were talking about, I was helping you out by clarifing that you was talking about talking heads and not attacking certain political viewpoints.It sounded at first that you were attacking conservatives.Thats why I also referenced Olberman's comments about the hot coffee scandal.

@MR.B
When it comes to the hot coffee scandal, Keith Olbermann was correct to name Rockstar the worst persons in the world. That scandal was 100% their doing and deserved all of the criticism they got.

@Hackangel

I'll help a little. This "gun culture" you speak of is only prevalent in that it is widespread and well reported. Most of the people who buy guns do it because they hunt. Those who buy handguns vary between wanting a hobby and self-defense. Basically, yes, people down here DO buy guns to shoot holes in paper. Truth be told, its somewhat of an anomaly if anyone but a cop has one while walking around. Many of the gangs down here use knives and bats. The use of a gun does, after all, draw every cop from about a mile around to your location.

MR.B
Mmmmm if I was attacking anyone it would be the fools on the frilly fringes.

-------------------------------------------------
Hackangel
The whole gun debate in the US can be viewed the same as any flawed or broken debate that trumps logic, guns are not the cause of deaths you can white wash the data the fact is humans will use anything to hurt themselfs with the UK has a knife problem, guns are neither good or bad,I mean one can say free will causes alot of deaths and skew facts and logic to remove free will as a choice in society.

Guns are a tool/device like any other we can start baning things left and right in the hope of saving lives but what will that cost us, its the same logic thos who hate on media spew.

Its just a fact remove guns something else will take its place, so guns really are not the issue people are, and as a society there is nothign that can be down abotu crazy people because of free will and the right of the indavendaul, if you remove both of these a indavendaul can be controlled and contained at the cost of freedom for all .

@Hackangel

You are right about one thing, violence is much more complicated than just blaming inanimate objects or speech.

1) Incorrect. The Columbine kids broke about 20 Federal and State gun laws a piece before they even started shooting. Two of the people who helped them illegally acquire the weapons went to prison for 5 and 6 years. Cho was a prohibited person under 18 U.S.C. 922(g). In order to buy his guns, he committed perjury twice when filling out the paperwork (which doubles as a de facto registry). That he wasn't stopped by the background check didn't stop him doesn't mean it was legal, just that he didn't get caught.

2) Yes, my handgun was purchased primarily for defense. The outcome of which would be for me to live, and for the attack to stop. Whether a potential attacker dies as a result, is merely injured, or scampers off after being missed/simply seeing it is inconsequential. My AR-15 on the other hand was bought for target shooting, and resides locked up and unloaded where it is of little use for defense. Well, that, and I wanted one before the new Congress banned them. :p

3) Did you miss the part of my post about the Deacons for Defense? They stood up to racist oppression bordering on genocide just 40 some odd years ago. As for that being the army's job or whatever, what happens if said army is doing the oppressing? The the whole point of the Second Amendment was so that a standing army could not take our other rights..

4) Again, it's easier for someone to flip out and make a bomb. As such, it's probably a good thing that they mostly limit themselves to firearms. Lots of people (gun owners included) suffer the misconception that firearms are all-powerful, magical talismans. Statistically speaking though, you only have a ~20% chance of dying from a handgun wound induced by a pistol round (about the same as being stabbed), ~40% from a rifle, and ~70% from a shotgun. And that's not counting how often people miss. In many mass shooting events, the perpetrator will fire off hundreds of rounds and only kill a few people. Should bombs ever become the weapon of choice for these nutcases, you would be looking at dozens, even hundreds of people dead from the first "shot."

5) Then ask your drug dealing associates to inquire further up the food chain. Chances are, someone in the supply line will be able get one. Probably within 48 hours.

6) Yes, our murder rate his high. However, our overall violent crime rate is something like one tenth that of the beautiful, "gun free" UK. It seems that our bad guys largely tend to confine themselves to killing each other over the drug trade or what have you. This is in no small part due to the fact they know that their would-be victims aren't defenseless. A number of DOJ surveys of inmates has shown that they fear armed victims more than they fear the police. One study showed that 34% of incarcerated felons said they have been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim" at some point.

And speaking of Mexico, a sizable portion of our murders are committed by, how shall we say this, "undocumented transnational pharmaceutical companies" along the border. For instance, California accounts for for roughly 18% of firearm related homicides (1,822/10,177) and Texas comes in at number 2 with 9.3% (949). There's a quarter of our homicides in two States. And according to some law enforcement estimates, half to two thirds of homicides in large cities around there are done by illegal immigrant drug gangs. Gangs who are already smuggling in millions of tons of narcotics, and would obviously have no problem bringing in tons of weaponry. In fact, there have been numerous busts of narcotraffickers carrying truckloads of automatic weapons, grenades, etc.. Naturally, the anti-gun lobby and Mexican government try to say they bought them all at gun shops here, despite the fact that full auto weapons were banned in '86 and grenades have been tightly restricted since 1934, but, yea..

Anyhow, I'm not quite so sure that Canada's gun culture is really all that different. Well, aside from some of the more urban provinces anyway. Last I heard, the Canadian government was thinking about ditching most of the gun registry system. Not to mention the tens of thousands of Canadians who exercised civil disobedience by refusing to register their guns in the first place. Our gun culture is mostly just louder. But like many other things here, from big SUVs to supersized fast food meals, ostentatiousness is to be expected. ;)

[...] Via Game Politics Share/Bookmark this story: [...]

And to reiterate, these little personal factoids that everyone loves to use here (such as the % of handgun owners with a license, blah blah) are again, mere table scraps! Not only are they a waste of space, but they are rather selfish in detail. No one will be influenced by it. In fact, opponents will be more determined to dig up little factoids of their to counter yours. Eventually it becomes a contest to see who has the bigger dick. Not cool.

Rather, look at the big picture, and why things are being done the way they are. If you follow Occam's Razor, the answers are almost instinctual, bordering on emotional. That is the way you influence other human beings, for it stirs the same feelings you feel in others.

If you believe that everything has a purpose, a lot of things become clear. Things like the publication of Cho's video confession, for instance, are not random events =)

[...] Via Game Politics Share/Bookmark this story: [...]

[...]  Former NBC appendage and aspiring Luddite Tom Brokaw believes in free speech—just not, you know, when people do or say something he doesn't like. In a radio interview with Townhall.com's Hugh Hewitt, the Brokawsaurus defended NBC's decision to air the tape of Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung Hui and grant the gunman his 15 minutes of infamy.The real enemies, Brokaw figures, are mind-rotting videogames and those evil blogs: Hugh Hewitt: "Do you not think (airing the tape of Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung Hui) is going to incite other people to try to do the same thing?"  Brokawsaurus: "No, I don’t. ... I don’t think we’re doing a very good job about talking about violence in this country, either. You know, Virginia Tech went away. We didn’t have any ongoing dialogue in our communities or on the air about the corrosive effect of violence."It was not what he, what people saw of him on the air that will drive them, it's what they read in blog sites, and what they see in videogames. It's that kind of stuff that I think is cancerous. "And I'm a free speech absolutist, but I think that at the same time, we have to have free speech in some kind of a context. And part of that context is a discussion of the possible effects of it."(Thanks to GamePolitics.com)  Link to this | E-mail this | Digg this | Post to del.icio.us Published Sunday, December 09, 2007 9:34 AM by tylertodd Filed under: Controversy [...]

[...] Tom Brokaw: Airing VA Tech Killer Videos Okay, But Blogs, Video Games “Cancerous” [Game Politics] [...]

...that's right. Blogs are cancerous. Does Tom ever blog? Does Tom ever visit or read blogs? Nope. Probably not. The question is: does Tom avoid them because he thinks they're cancerous or does he think they're cancerous because he avoids them?

Brokaw is being very true to his belief system. The rest of us are idiots, and we should only get to hear and must believe whatever crap he wants to feed us. He's smarter than the rest of us, you know.

Remember when you had to sit there and listen to his drivel and had no way of telling him how full of crap or how biased he was? I love blogs. They are the cure for the mainstream media cancer.

Mass media puts a lot of ideas into people's minds, I really don't see how Brokaw thinks that the media isn't responcible when someone copy cats something. Case in point: Local tv stations showing how to protect you from credit card fraud and then go into extreme detail about how the crooks do it. How many would-be crooks did they just make because someone wants to try it?

[...] Tom Brokaw supports free speech absolutely, so long as the free speech is limited in scope and not covering something he thinks is bad for society. Oh, and games and blogs are cancerous [...]

VIDEO GAMES DO NOT ENCOURAGE VIOLENCE. IF YOU DISAGREE IN ANY WAY CONTACT ME AT : figsnake12@googlemail.co.uk