I don't understand here... we're upset that the media - a collection of FOR-PROFIT companies - aren't talking about a story that the majority of its customers aren't comfy hearing?
Americans are watered-down, wimpy, soft, straight up cowards who don't want to think about such things. And, the media doesn't show them because they want to keep their consumers happy.
I think the anger comes when people don't realize the media companies don't exist with some noble cause of "reporting the truth" or "deliveringthe facts" or anything like that. They exist to make money by selling ad space to go with news 'stories' which keep their viewers engaged.
If they existed to do the RIGHT thing, they'd start each day talking about national debt, optional wars, shady dealings with congressman, etc. And people would turn it off, since the viewers are bored idiots, and the media companies would lose money. Instead, they start each news day with Miley twerking, spring break follies, blonde hotties that have been missing for months, etc.
We can't get mad at it, once we understand that like VH1 or BET or Oxygen or TLC or AMC, they're just entertainment channels for the masses of idiots. That's it. SO no, they wont cover a story like this which makes everyone uncomfortable. Instead, we go to the home page of
http://www.foxnews.com/ and it's all about "backlash for a a terror attack 363 days ago is now hurting obama's push for a legit syrian war". Bullshit from head to toe - but it keeps voters engaged.