On Mon, 15 Feb 1999 09:52:32 -0800, Hybrid-T <hybrid_T at hotmail.com>
>Victoria Clare wrote:
>>> All absolutely true. But alas, properly reasoned and factually
>> supported advice to 'be a bit careful and think ahead' is
>> un-newsworthy enough that 99 times in 100 it will be totally ignored
>> in the rush. At least panic gets noticed.
>>Oh, yeah, just like "War of the Worlds", right? Or... um... Y1K... or
>mass suicides over the approach of a comet.... I'm sure other people
>could come up with more examples...
Yes. I'm a historian by training - I can think of several. But very
few which have had more effect than the wholesale ignoring, for years,
decades, even, of sensible, reasoned, cautious options in favour of
the quick money. On the whole, sensible people ignore panics and are
not harmed by them. Politicians are rarely sensible people. . .
>I'll take cold scientific facts over panic and hysteria. People have a
>right to know the truth even if it's not spectacular. You can't
>exaggerate the facts just so people will notice.
You will. I will. But the Daily Mail won't, nor will the Sun. And
Tony Blair pays more attention to them than us.