What's in a name?

The title of an article in sources of news can be very telling as to the point of view from which that news establishment is coming at with each story that they publish. This was made very clear to me today in seeing the different ways in which different news organizations have covered the recent information brought forward about Guantanamo Bay.

Perhaps I'm strange in feeling this way but to me the most important aspect of the story was the large number of detainees who were completely innocent of any charges for which they were being held and apparently the only actual news organization that agrees is Al Jazeera, with their video segment titled, "Most Guantanamo Prisoners Were No Threat."

Contrast that against the Sydney Morning Herald who decided instead to go with, "Guantanamo 'freed many high-risk inmates'." This is still an important aspect of the story though I don't understand how letting high-risk people go is worse than unconstitutionally jailing innocent people without any kind of rights to due process. It is definitely coming from a different ideological perspective than the Al Jazeera story.

The most bizarre one was the Fox News title for their story on the situation, "U.S. Officials Condemn Release of Secret Guantanamo Files." So according to Fox News the important story isn't the unconstitutional holding of innocent people or the release of people who have gone back to commit terrorist acts from Guantanamo, the story is instead that Wikileaks has the gall to tell us that these things are happening.

We live in strange times here in the states.