Go to Editormum's Oddments
- Add a comment
- Go to Self-Centered Reporting
Your point to me means...We cannot afford to respond to these as we have.
We cannot continue to practice a "Lone Ranger" approach to disasters. Literally. It costs too much in money, human lives, and goodwill. (No, not "Goodwill Induatries", two lies in one name).
However, humans are "wired" to become active, aggitated, concerned when there is an acute, short-term danger. Lolng term dangers like threats to coastal areas by flooding, the AIDS epidemic, global hunger and warlordism will not trip the "danger" wire except each time they do one thing we recognize as "a catastrophe".
Who manages the industrialized nations' emotions and reasoning? The media.
Who's busy selling us Abrcrombie and Fitch and SUV's? The media.
So...think about it.
posted by
majroj
on September 7, 2005 at 10:27 AM
| link to this | reply
I think it, in part, has to do with the old...
...Man bites dog theory--which goes that, if a dog bites a man, that isn't as big of news as if a man bites a dog for the simple reason that the first is commonplace while the latter is unusual and, thus, news.
We hear of so many cases of flooding, drought, earthquakes, mudslides, volcanic eruptions, etc. going on in the Third World that it has become commonplace and has to be pretty major stuff (e.g. the tsunami) before it receives a lot of media attention.
If we had this kind of hurricane happening constantly on the Gulf Coast, there would be a time when it didn't get reported, either.
Look at the execution of Gary Gilmore.
He was the first person executed after the death penalty was brought back, so there was a lot of coverage of the time leading up to the execution, the execution, and the days afterwards.
Now, I've lost track of the number of people who have been executed since 1977, even though I'm an opponent of capital punishment.
Not a lot of coverage is given to pending executions/executions any more unless there's something different about them (e.g. Karla Faye Tucker-Brown).
I'm old enough to remember how it was when we launched a man a few feet into space higher than an airplane would go, and this got a lot of coverage. These days, space missions have become routine enough that we aren't even always aware when one is launched.
Because the main media can only cover so much and must pick and choose, letting people know about other disasters might be falling on the shoulders of bloggers and other online writers when it comes to getting the word out!
Blessings!
AJ 
Here is a collection of
my thoughts and the
thoughts of others to
try to sort through all
that has taken place
during the past few
days. Go here...
posted by
Ainsley_Jo_Phillips
on September 6, 2005 at 6:10 PM
| link to this | reply
Editormum
I hasten to add that the sentiments expressed in my comment were definitely not mine!
They are what I percive to be a common attitude in western media. And, ys, I do suspect that the tsunami received so much coverage simply because it involved westerners.
The flooding that regularly occurs in Bangladesh, for instance, doesn't receive half as much, does it? Media coverage is total ; for a little while.
One could list a dozen catastrophes - some lasting for decades - that receive little or no coverage. Like Algeria, Congo, Darfur etc
posted by
ariel70
on September 6, 2005 at 8:27 AM
| link to this | reply
Now, then, wait a sec...
We were all over the tsunami, and that happened in Asia ... I mean, for months, I couldn't go anywhere, do anything, watch anything on tv, or surf the net, without seeing Tsunami. So we do care about Asia.
Or do you think that was just because the tsunami happened in a rich white people's playground?
posted by
editormum
on September 6, 2005 at 8:03 AM
| link to this | reply
editormum
That's been going on for ages.
But Asia? Who cares about Asia? So, a million people get killed ; what's that compared to a handful of Europeans?
This is the strong impression that one gets from the newspapers ; utter callousness
posted by
ariel70
on September 6, 2005 at 7:37 AM
| link to this | reply