I am very bias towards the media (I worked in the industry for several years when I was younger) I don't think the fact the the US president was in the vacinity would have made any difference. Its kind of like saying remove all aircraft and satelites from the vacinity incase one of them malfunction too. If the missile had remained in control then nobody would have been any wiser, a rocket? drone? missile? possibly just a test rocket/missile that malfunctioned. The Russians are denying it of course, how embarasing, if it is another country then they are obviously not going to put thier hands up and admit it.
The less you here from the media, implicates that authorities/governments do know what it is, they just don't want us to know, they are quite happy to let speculation float around until it is forgotten.
Imagine the public reaction "US millitary rocket malfunctions over california, the rocket was propelled by a highly toxic chemical reactor, this is the first of many expected to malfunction over a city near you, but don't worry we'll get it right at some stage no mater what the cost"
The media is highly censored when it comes to anything that might cause public backlash. The truth is, the truth is bad for business, so we never get to here it.
I added to a post a few weeks ago in "Queensland the first state of global union" have a look at Peter Spence and how he is portrayed by the media, they completely avoid mentioning anything about his farming practices and the reason his farm was taken possesion of by the rudd govt. The media is just a tool of the powers that be.
