Tabloids are having a field day with claims of looting and corpses left to rot as a "final insult to the dead". Yet there has been no video of looters stuffing Euros into their pockets, despite the presence of 24/7 camera crews. Meanwhile others reporters are confirming that bodies are being recovered and sent to the morgue. So who is right?
Another contradiction are claims that "We have compelling evidence that THEY did it" yet at the same time there are headlines saying "THEY'RE destroying the evidence". So which is it? You either have the evidence or you don't, right?
What is reported as "fact" is so often just conjecture, opinion or simply made up, either to support a political narrative or boost ratings. Media reporting should have no bearing on an official investigation, but of course, they will have a huge influence in the court of public opinion.
The media are so desperate to get their ratings up, they'll literally let anybody have their say. Look how MSNBC got punked on the day of the crash:
Military intelligence, in particular that of the US, will already know exactly where that missile was launched from. They have infrared satellites and ground-based monitoring for missile launches in that region already. They're not going to reveal their imagery in public unless no other evidence turns up - but they won't sit on it either.
One could argue that if any side had firm evidence of the other side's culpability they would produce it.
The political damage to the opponent would be of far more real-world value than any possible impact from revealing one's technical ability, which the other side had probably already guessed or been made aware of.
I disagree. There's a very promising international investigation being planned, and they have an excellent track record of success.