I think two separate issues are at risk of being run together in debates such as this. One is the entirely reasonable view that there are motives and powers that politicians don't want you to know about. Another is the view that politicians have godlike capabilities to control the media and the public debate. Accepting the first does not lend any credibility whatsoever to theories that would require accepting the second. Similarly, it is one thing to say that the jihadists have edited the video and another thing to say that it's a stunt pulled out by the US. The first statement is a form of reasonable skepticism; the second one is a form of tinfoiled conspiracymongering. It is simply disingenuous to try to lump them together under some vague umbrella term such as 'media management'.
I think two separate issues are at risk of being run together in debates such as this. One is the entirely reasonable view that there are motives and powers that politicians don't want you to know about. Another is the view that politicians have godlike capabilities to control the media and the public debate. Accepting the first does not lend any credibility whatsoever to theories that would require accepting the second. Similarly, it is one thing to say that the jihadists have edited the video and another thing to say that it's a stunt pulled out by the US. The first statement is a form of reasonable skepticism; the second one is a form of tinfoiled conspiracymongering. It is simply disingenuous to try to lump them together under some vague umbrella term such as 'media management'.