NEWS: This is the iraqi journalist, Muntazar-al-Zaidi, who hurled both his shoes at U.S. president, George W. Bush, during the latter's Iraq visit.Now, lets see the media language playdown, how the news agencies add phrases according to their leanings:
Who was thrust to instant fame: The fact is, he was not thrust to fame, he in fact rose to fame, he became famous. How does it matter if you like his fame or not, unless you are siding with one or the other!
Most notorious pair of black leather shoes:
How come the shoes became notorious? Only because the media's deliberate sympathies go with the target.
Iraq shoe-thrower to go on trial :
He is not a shoe-thrower, he is a journalist who dared throw shoes at the president of the United States. He still remains a journalists who threw shoes, and not a shoe-thrower.
The question: Why does the media report it indifferently adding such subtle yet far reaching phrases?
I can see racism, superemacy, jealousy, media-infilteration and government-pressure behind such reporting.
