Re: Daniel Pearl

[SteveOrdinetz <steveord@bit-net.com>]

  Donna Halper wrote:

>Mr Pearl was not doing a business story.  Rather, he was doing 
>investigative reporting about ties between Al Qaeda and the Pakistani 
>police/military.  I believe that is a very important story, since like 
>Saudi Arabia, Pakistan is allegedly our ally.  Only recently has there 
>been any investigative reporting about what is happening in Afghanistan 
>(or Pakistan):  until a few weeks ago, we got only the Donald Rumsfeld 
>version with no mention of bombs that misfired or civilian casualties or 
>anything else.


We must keep in mind that Daniel Pearl put himself in danger by trying to 
get the story.  He's not exactly an innocent civilian bystander.  His 
death, tragic as it may be was in the line of duty in a career of his 
choosing.  Certainly he (and his family) must have been aware of the 
dangers involved.

Someone compared this to the Princess Diana coverage...first of all I don't 
see the Pearl story as having been over-covered (at least in any media I've 
read/listened to), secondly, I DO think the Princess Diana story was way 
over-covered.  Yeah, report it, but wall to wall coverage???  Must have 
been a slow news week.