But the more important question is why do newspapers ignore incidents of sectarian strife? This is not the first time, and it will not be the last time, for us to know about such incidents from Facebook and Twitter, rather than from the newspapers.
Is it the editorial policy of the newspapers not to cover sectarian incidents? Do they believe that by ignoring them they would trigger no public reaction and would thereby put an end to them? Do they want to say such incidents do not occur in the first place? Perhaps they are not interested because every time the houses and churches of Copts are burnt the perpetrators are not punished.
Obscuring news worked when the sources of information were only newspapers and magazines. Bu today we have social networking sites that inform us immediately and before the papers are printed.
In fact, obscuring such news makes the victims of sectarian strife suffer more because they feel the papers are in complicity with what is going on.
It is the duty of the newspapers to inform people of what takes place. And if the minute personal or religious inclinations determine what should be published and what should not, the credibility of the newspapers will fall. They should know that they are no longer the only source of information.
________________________________
Edited/abridged translation from Al-Masry Al-Youm. http://www.egyptindependent.com//opinion/obscurity