does media coverage make one person more important than another?
YES.

There has been talk over here for some time of zero publicity for certain 'crimes'.
But the civil liberty tossers still believe that they know best, and that everyone should be told everything............
although the British media DO keep certain things quiet [royal family / footballers on the pi55 / all the 'important' stuff to us Brits]

To go back to when he was first taken, and his family were on the TV, calling the government for everything.........
They were taken away by large men, to a secluded address, and [presumably] told the facts of life.
The next time they were on TV, they read from a script that I could have written, [ I didn't write it, but like soap opera's, it's not rocket science to say the 'right' things] they 'praised' the terrorists and kept calling him by his name and title [dad / brother / son, etc] to personalise him, to make him a human, not a piece of meat.

The belief round here is that the terrorists actually believed that due to the commotion of the first nights TV display, that there was a chance that they could finish off the UK government just as easily as the Spanish government. [train bomb. some dead and wounded. Spain elects a new government that pulls its troops out of Iraq]

After the scripted TV displays, he was kept alive as an embarassment to the UK government, until he was no longer considered worth the effort of keeping.

As an aside: WHEN the US / UK special forces catch up with these 'people' there will be hell to pay when they are killed, and not captured, as it will be apparent that we sent in troopers with clear 'shoot to kill' orders........

In Northern Ireland, the SAS were accused of 'shoot to kill' tactics ?
I personally would have court martialled any that MISSED.
What is the point of all that expensive training if it never gets utilised ?

Another example would be WWII. Most people believe that Hitler was obsessed with killing Jews.
Hitler merely used the Jewish community's as a scapegoat, "they are rich whilst we are poor" sort of stuff. Although it is true that he developed a hatred for them during his time in the trenches of WW1. [they - apparently - were NEVER in the front line]
He 'allowed' the German people to blame them for EVERYTHING that was bad / wrong with Germany.
Inflation in the Weimar Republic was at FOUR MILLION % [the Jews fault]
Unemployment was practically compulsory [the Jews fault]
It was cold in winter [you get the picture]

From this, he built an army of support and finally got control of Germany with just enough time before the war started to implement his 'Final Solution'

Allegedly, the original 'solution' was to transport them to Madagascar.............

However, he not only thought the unthinkable, he attempted the unbelievable.........

Which leads us back to the here and now:

The WWW allows us to access data in real time, that only a few years ago would have been impossible. Each day we get more and more capabilities, the terrorists of today, far from being narrow minded and simplistic. Are at the very heart of 'our' IT revolution. THEY, not us, are making the running in what we can and cannot see on the TV screens re:- Iraq.
Our leaders are farting against thunder.

They have thought the unthinkable: [live TV de-capitation............]
Therefore they MUST be attempting the unbelievable............ [WMD, coming to a place near you, SOON]

ABC
Atomic = too costly / time consuming / too static [Iran's nuclear reactors v Israeli Air Force ?]
Bacterialogical = too specialised / time consuming / too open to chance [bugs mutate, not all mutations are harmful ?]
Chemical = cheap [relative] / available / transportable [FedEx anyone ? guaranteed 24 hr delivery, AND you can keep tabs on where it is ...........] / we only defend our troops ? / deployable [fill your back pack up, and go swimming in a reservoir ?]