I googled Bradley Manning today for news hits and got 9,120. Did the same thing for Julian Assange and got 901,000. Which makes me wonder why the media is so drawn to Assange but, in the entire scope of coverage, Manning — the private many, including the U.S. government — believe released those tens of thousands of files to Assange.
They’re really not that different; both have been described as computer geeks/nerds/hackers. Both are in custody faces charges, although Assange is in Britain and Manning is in jail in Kuwait.
Both are being pilloried and praised but only one seems to commanding the attention of the journalistic world. Any ideas why?
I googled Bradley Manning today for news hits and got 9,120. Did the same thing for Julian Assange and got 901,000. Which makes me wonder why the media is so drawn to Assange but, in the entire scope of coverage, Manning — the private many, including the U.S. government — believe released those tens of thousands of files to Assange.
They’re really not that different; both have been described as computer geeks/nerds/hackers. Both are in custody faces charges, although Assange is in Britain and Manning is in jail in Kuwait.
Both are being pilloried and praised but only one seems to commanding the attention of the journalistic world. Any ideas why?
[node:ad]
What about Manning?
I googled Bradley Manning today for news hits and got 9,120. Did the same thing for Julian Assange and got 901,000. Which makes me wonder why the media is so drawn to Assange but, in the entire scope of coverage, Manning — the private many, including the U.S. government — believe released those tens of thousands of files to Assange.
They’re really not that different; both have been described as computer geeks/nerds/hackers. Both are in custody faces charges, although Assange is in Britain and Manning is in jail in Kuwait.
Both are being pilloried and praised but only one seems to commanding the attention of the journalistic world. Any ideas why?
I googled Bradley Manning today for news hits and got 9,120. Did the same thing for Julian Assange and got 901,000. Which makes me wonder why the media is so drawn to Assange but, in the entire scope of coverage, Manning — the private many, including the U.S. government — believe released those tens of thousands of files to Assange.
They’re really not that different; both have been described as computer geeks/nerds/hackers. Both are in custody faces charges, although Assange is in Britain and Manning is in jail in Kuwait.
Both are being pilloried and praised but only one seems to commanding the attention of the journalistic world. Any ideas why?
Dale Bass
December 16, 2010
Manning has a fence around
Manning has a fence around him, literally and figuaratively. He’s doing nothing new, and there’s nothing new other people — other than perhaps some pundits — are saying about him. He’s dried up.
Assange is a continuing source of new news. There’s news from England –bail, the role of Interpol, where he is imprisoned (reporters can get near Assange but not near Bradley, wherever he may be),extradition process, etc. In Sweden –what’s “rape” anyway?– there’s cultural stories about seduction and one night stands and more.
Assange has partners who are stories.
Bradley’s all by himself.
As for TV, there are pictures that move of Assange, and nothing for Bradley.
Same for stills on the web or in print.
Women lust after Assange, even now. A desired demographic who want to read.
Not sure who is lusting after Manning but it’s not a prime advertising audience.
One is a hero and zealot, and one is a thief and zealot. Heroes always get more ink.
December 16, 2010
What you’re really saying,
What you’re really saying, Brian, is that Assange is a much easier and more accessible story. He’s not hard work. He rolls it out all for us. He appeals to the stenographer in us.
An enterprising journalist might find Manning to be the much better story. Personally, that’s what I’m waiting for.