Just finished reading the front page stories in today's Washington Post on Boston bombings. One of the stories mentions the role of crowd sourcing and social media, referring to what they call “vigilante detectives” who propound wildly “irresponsible” theories of what happened. I think it well represents what the Post thinks of web sites such as Phi Beta Iota. Especially interesting is they quote the mother of the Chechen alleged bombers regarding the FBI knowing about them for years. However, they say nothing, zero, zilch, not a word anywhere in the paper about her or father saying the FBI framed them. Very selective quoting.
Also, while the article rants about innumerable vigilante detectives with their cell phone cameras getting in the way of professional investigators, analyzing the photos for clues, they omit any mention whatsoever of vigilante detectives noticing the Craft operatives with their backpacks, and have many pictures to prove it. Whatever one thinks of the significance of those pictures, it is utterly irresponsible journalism to omit any attention to them. Very, very selective reporting, and clearly shows the most powerful propaganda works especially by omissions of facts, of avoiding notice or mention of what is right in front of one's eyes or ears..
Police, citizens and technology factor into Boston bombing probe
But for 102 hours last week, nothing seemed certain in the manhunt that paralyzed a major metropolis, captivated the nation and confronted counterterrorism operatives with the troubling and unforgiving world of social media and vigilante detective work.”
