Fine article, generally.I guess it's because the story was written by an Aussie to whom the terror organisation JI (Indonesia)and the name Hambali rings louder bells than Yousef.
However, I'm inclined to agree leaving out the mastermind shows how shallow journalistic research is, regardless of nationality.
Journalism is inherently shallow since, as a genre of nonfiction, it is defined by its deadlines.Journalism is also inherently arrogant when it presumes to be more objective than the general public. Objectivity is a virtue, and it is arrogant to argue from a claim of your own superior virtue.
That's why sophistry has such a bad name - it's simply the assumption of your own superior wisdom. And if two people each argue from the assumption that they are wiser than the other, you don't have a debate but a shouting match, if not a fistfight.
Can't thank you enough for that link:
Why Broadcast Journalism is Unnecessary and Illegitimate
Sept 14, 2001
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts
Now I'm going back to read more of the thread.
I'm getting up in years, lad. My hair is white now, and my hands aren't as steady as they were. If my grandaddy told me truly, he could remember when journalists reported news instead of fiction. Three or four reporters still did report news when he was a youth, he said.
Dad drat the cat, Hattie, where did you put my cane and my scarf?