Printable View
There was a wolf because the original orator of the tale wanted to demonstrate that constant, or repeated false alarms of danger will eventually lead to people becoming apathetic or desensitized to the point where they will either ignore or not act as quickly when real danger is present. :bulb:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
There is a difference between warning to stay careful (watch out for wolves) and making false claims (there's wolves in my house).Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
But there's no difference between "repeating a message ad nauseam" and "repeating a message ad nauseam".Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Let me outline the scenario for you since you seem to be missing it:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Bystander #000001: Officers, that unattended package I saw might be a bomb!
Officers: We've determined that the package was not a bomb, but instead a children's toy packaged for delivery.
TV News: Officers responding to the presence of a possible bomb determine that it was instead a packaged children's toy, forgotten by its owner.
... more of the same ...
Bystander #000054: Officers, that unattended suitcase I saw might be a bomb!
Officers: We've determined that the suitcase was not a bomb, but instead a regular mundane suitcase.
TV News: Officers responding to the presence of a possible bomb find instead that a passenger rushing to make a train left behind one of his suitcases.
... more of the same ...
Bystander #002973: Officers, that unattended brown paper sack I saw might be a bomb!
Officers: We've determined that the brown paper sack was not a bomb, but instead a handle of cheap rum.
TV News: Officers responding to the presence of a possible bomb find a handle of cheap rum, likely left behind by a drunk in his stupor.
... more of the same ...
Bystander #091323: Officers, that person acting awkward and nervously checking his watch might be planning a terrorist attack!
Officers: We've determined that the person was just an average introverted 20 year old male college student waiting for a date.
TV News: Officers responding to the presence of a possible terrorist find instead a nervous college student waiting for a date.
... more of the same ...
Bystander #342102: I wonder what that abandoned package over there is...ehh, its probably some mundane crap like the last hundred thousand times...
TV News: Reports are coming in that the death toll is estimated to be around 32 with dozens more injured from the detonation of an improvised explosive that went off in downtown...
So its more down to a difference of warning people to stay careful and be observant, and telling people to be suspicious of everything, and equally paranoid about mundane things. The latter results in many false reports that will eventually erode its effectiveness and just result in a suspicious and paranoid populace. :bored:
News Update: The date was, in fact, a bomb.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :D
:up:Quote:
So its more down to a difference of warning people to stay careful and be observant, and telling people to be suspicious of everything, and equally paranoid about mundane things. The latter results in many false reports that will eventually erode its effectiveness and just result in a suspicious and paranoid populace. :bored:
Illusions: Your logic only works if all the false concerns reached TV news, which they don't.
But if nothing at all happens, then those suggestions will be equally "effective".Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
No, if it gets checked by the proper authorities but nothing happens if its all OK then it will be effective, if it was bad then a crime could be stopped and either way it won't be crying wolf.
The radio advert currently playing here I mentioned above starts with multiple people say "It's probably nothing but ... " then some suspicious activity and says then that most people who call the anti-terrorist hotline say "It's probably nothing" and "most of the time, it it probably is nothing. But what if its not." That is reasonable behaviour.
I train my employees to look out for suspicious behaviour. Not for terrorists, but for thieves/pranks etc are more likely. Again I've always said in the training most people are legit, but sometimes someone is not, so just be careful and keep your eye out for it. In the past besides pranks the warnings were theoretical but now I've had 7 unrelated security incidents at work this year - 3 vandalism, 4 involving violence/violent threats. The most serious could quite possibly have resulted in some of my colleagues being murdered. In addition in my personal life I've had my car vandalised, my house broken into (and I disturbed the buglar so that could have turned nasty) and a colleague of mine, not work related so again didn't count it above had his house broken into and himself attacked and by armed burglars. Bad stuff happens and it saves lives to be vigilant.
Right. However, what you're quite stubbornly refusing to see: The concept of "too much of a good thing" does indeed exist.
I wonder what's so difficult to grasp about that idea. And, yes, Rand, advertising in the radio and TV and at every train station is indeed too much.
Not sure about you guys, but my area could never handle all the 911 calls from Walmart or the mall, for every "suspicious person or package". Our police just isn't staffed for that, and we don't see many State Troopers around, either.
I've heard more in the news about people responding to false bomb threats in the United States than actual devices. I'm fairly certain others have too. It also doesn't have to be all of them, just enough for people to become apathetic. You're also completely disregarding the other point that there is a difference between telling people to be cautious and observant, and getting them to act suspicious of everything, and equally paranoid.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
RB, assholes abound, terrorists do not.
Going back to this, I can demonstrate a real world example of this effect by pointing out the cultural paranoia present in modern society towards men and children, where quite often men will have to demonstrate or go to extreme lengths in order to prove to others that they are not child predators. This paranoia is quite modern, and did not occur decades ago, but is very likely the result of media presenting and showing men to be child predators, and also the more widespread focus on child abduction and pedophilia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
It can be assumed that if we treat terrorism in the same manner as we have treated child abduction and child predation that we will see a similar outcome to how people respond to it.
Edit: Although it would be pretty funny to have Chris Hansen sitting potential terrorists down on To Catch a Terrorist...
And so it begins...
WalMart locked down after customer complains aboutcrazied armed gunmangentleman talking on his cellphone.
The WTF part:
Even after the police made contact, and searched his car, and decided that it was a cellphone and not a gun...he was still taken into custody.
Nuke from orbit to be sure.
Anyway, needs to be verified by another party. Seems too crazy to be entirely true.
Actually, what really happens is not that people report all sorts of instances in which suspect packages are mistakenly thought of as possible bombs. What really happens is that all packages that could be mistaken for bombs pretty much disappear so that it is more likely that packages that are reported are security threaths. I see that in Istanbul, and I am pretty certain that everybody who's ever been to Israel can tell you the same. Alertness in the general public does make it harder for terrorists to operate unnoticed.