for 2 or 3 days i have been in conversation with a few others about an incident on sunday. A matter was bought to my attention that we or i should not be talking about it openly because the suspects in question had not been specifically or officially charged or connected with incidents that had occured since friday. We or i couldnt talk about it openly yet it was alright for the "media" to talk and sensationalize the incidents. What is going on there ?
I then said my bit again as previously i was making fun of it or the "media". This was then miread or misunderstood by another.
so i replied back and then said that i agreed with their original point and that we had our wires crossed.
Fair enough you might think.
I thought that was the end of it.
the following day i posted another paragraph of opinion all related to the topic of conversation.
So i get the inevitable backlash but not that serious at all . It was lighthearted mostly except for one. fair enough but it was the context of their arguement if you could call it that as i am still not clear on this.
what i think they meant was that i shouldnt watch any media at all as i was questioning it.
Or : I should buy papers and watch news otherwise i wont know whats going on then i wont be worried about things.
Or : If i say i am not worried then that is wrong because the media say i should be.
Or : If i criticise journalism or papers that is wrong as i am in no position to do so .
Or : I can read or watch something about an incident but i cant talk about it but everyone else can.
i could go on but its boring
this person doesnt have an arguement i dont think but maybe something else is motivating them .