I really don't appreciate the media's blood thirst - the slayer of this and the killer of that. Why can't we just have something that contributes in a non-zero-sum game?
You never had journalistic training. Journalists frame stories to satisfy criteria of "newsworthiness," a combined measure of the story's importance, urgency, and entertainment value. Just like a good novel has a dramatic conflict, journalists are taught to report on stories with conflict (which are often more interesting to read than dull, peaceful hum-drum). And if the story doesn't have conflict built-in, they make conflict by framing the story to include a conflict narrative. Journalists refer to the way they frame a story as their "angle." Anything can be news with the right angle.
Real life example: in the 90s, journalists reported on the "Great Hacker War," a "virtual gang war" between two competing hacker groups, LOD & MOD. In reality, the event was a scuffle between some hackers in a chat room, which resulted in some minor hacking, name calling, and prank phone calls. But that didn't make for a great headline.
Real life example: in the 90s, journalists reported on the "Great Hacker War," a "virtual gang war" between two competing hacker groups, LOD & MOD. In reality, the event was a scuffle between some hackers in a chat room, which resulted in some minor hacking, name calling, and prank phone calls. But that didn't make for a great headline.