MSM headlines ignore heightened tensions in Syria conflict

The US shot down a Syrian warplane a few days ago, the pilot is currently being “held” by Kurdish forces on the ground. The plane was targeting moderate fighters under American protection, according to the Americans, and bombing terrorists according to the Syrian government.

As a result of this, Russia has ceased cooperation with the US on air-missions over Syrian air-space, and issued several statements which amount to, essentially, an ultimatum.

The Syrian government has written letters to the UNSC and intends to address them soon.

Australia, in what appears to be a panicked “well, this is none of our business” move, has ceased all missions over Syria with immediate effect.

You’d be forgiven for not knowing any of this was happening, given the front pages of Britain’s five major papers all chose to focus a on a collection of non-events and nothing issues:

The Times considered that a Tory chancellor focusing on business was more important than a potential world war.

The Guardian chose to focus on the shocking story of bankers committing fraud, and the leadership contest for a party with 12 MPs…

…and the Telegraph agreed.

The Indy decided that Britain’s exit from the EU was more important than the prospect of the EU being immolated.

The front page of the Daily Mail is, as expected, awful.

Considering that media-complicity in spreading anti-Assad and anti-Russian propaganda is a big reason the US-Russia tensions have been allowed to get this bad, that they should stick their heads in the sand when the situation starts to degenerate is unforgivable.

Is this a concerted effort to hide the truth from the public? Or a case of institutional negative panic?