Mens Tennis Forums banner

Are western lives presented as more valuable in world media?

  • Yes, sadly I think so

    Votes: 26 76.5%
  • No, I dont believe this

    Votes: 5 14.7%
  • Im undecided on this issue

    Votes: 3 8.8%

Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

8K views 130 replies 32 participants last post by  buddyholly 
#1 ·
This thread is partly in response to the massive coverage the 2011 Japan Earthquake has got, and partially in response to other issues.

Firstly, I want to reiterate that this crisis deserves all of the coverage it is getting, and then some. It is a tradgedy of epic proportions, the first time we have really seen a live Tsunami sweaping away hundreds of lives on television.

However, that doesn't change the fact that all natural disasters are epic tradgedys. Infact, the reality is community spirit is probably even stronger in 3rd world countries than it is in many of the wealthier ones, where a drive for sucess and materialistic world is what many of us live in. The fact is these disasters affect all countries in the same profound way.

Why is it some get more coverage than others?

For example, the 2004 Tsunami death toll was a gradual rise, and although not apparent the scale of it at the time, it wasnt really until the death toll reached 20 000 plus that people really started to give a damn.

We dont know how many are dead in Japan, it could be many more than 10 thousand, could not. But that doesnt change the scale of the coverage.

The 2010 Haiti earthquake killed 300 000, yet it probably only got as much coverage or slightly less than Japan is getting, despite being infinately worse.

The 2003 Earthquake in Iran killed 26 000 people, I barely remember any coverage.

The 2005 Pakistan Earthquake killed 80 000 people and did not get half the coverage the Japan earthquake has got.

The 2006 Java earthquake killed 6000 but was barely front page news.

Whilst I was humbled by the press the 2011 New Zealand earthquake got, 200 odd dead in an earthquake in China would probably not get any attention at all.

Am I clueless or missing something? There definately does seem a trend toward this, and not just for disasters. For acts of war, for famines and preventible diseases too.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

It's because the media figures that people know more about Japan and Nez Zealand than Pakistan or Indonesia and therefore they give it more coverage.

I disagree about Haiti though, that got a ton of coverage.
 
#5 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Of course Haiti got lots of coverage, but if the death toll were say 25 000 I doubt it would have.
 
#6 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

the indonesia and haiti earthquakes received massive media attention and rightfully so. in the case of japan, the economic and geopolitical ramifications are far greater for an advanced, industrialized nation which also happens to be the world's third largest economy. in addition, a crippled japan gives communist china hegemony over the east and even greater influence globally, and the potential nuclear disaster will increase public resistance to nuclear energy over fossil fuels. you have to look at the "big picture".
 
#7 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Very true Western media will identify more with the Western world values.it is kind of normal, people will usually care more about people that have a culture values more similar to them than otherwise.
 
#11 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Just a small example but a relevant bump;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earthquakes_in_the_2010s_(by_death_toll)

This sandy disaster has recieved monumental coverage with about 100 deaths, though in all honesty the coverage would have been the same if it were only 10. The coverage was massive from the start.

The 2012 Iran Earthquake killing 300+ was barely headlines for more than 3 days. I wasnt aware at all of the Phillipines or Afghanistan earthquakes this year.

People say.."oh but look at the infrastructual damage caused by Sandy"..dont those people think the same infrastructual damage happens in other countries?

At least USA is first world and the damage will be repaired before long. Those other countries probably take a lifetime to rebuild.

Sandy is a massive tradgedy. All my USA friends live on the east coast, and I am not heartless in the slightest.

But WHY don't other disasters get this much attention from WORLD MEDIA? This is not a dig a the USA media, it's their country, of course they will pay it more attention. But the WORLD media has been following this storm like a baseball game.
 
#12 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

But WHY don't other disasters get this much attention from WORLD MEDIA? This is not a dig a the USA media, it's their country, of course they will pay it more attention. But the WORLD media has been following this storm like a baseball game.
You still want to flog this dead old horse. It is simply a matter of ease of reporting and also the relevance to the reader.

I went to Phuket a few days after the tsunami, because the friend who invited me to his house was able to email me and tell me that Phuket was virtually untouched. And it was true, yet CNN relentlessly reported on the ''tragedy'' from Phuket, day after day. Why? Because all the hotels were open to house the reporters, the electricity was on to send reports and the airport was open to land by commercial jet right in Phuket.

There was not much reporting from Banda Aceh because there was no way to get there, even though the devastation at banda Aceh was infinitely greater than at Phuket.

Also, the situation in Phuket was of interest to all who had vacationed there, were going to vacation there, or had friends there at the time. As for Banda Aceh, you tell the world that it was destroyed and that is enough info because virtually nobody outside Indonesia has a personal interest.

Same would go for an earthquake in the mountains of Pakistan. I don't need details because I have no personal connection.

You are trying to make this to be something it isn't. And maybe make yourself look like you care.
 
#13 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

What I take issue with is the symptathy level for 100 human beings dying in Iran vs 100 human beings dying in USA is astronomical from most people.

Simply put, most people just don't give a shit. They'l nod and say "thats sad", and not give it a second thought.

But they will be captivated by this storm in USA whether they plan to travel there or not. Look at the economy, most people around the world are never visiting USA anytime soon. But so much they still do care.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

What I take issue with is the symptathy level for 100 human beings dying in Iran vs 100 human beings dying in USA is astronomical from most people.

Simply put, most people just don't give a shit. They'l nod and say "thats sad", and not give it a second thought.

But they will be captivated by this storm in USA whether they plan to travel there or not. Look at the economy, most people around the world are never visiting USA anytime soon. But so much they still do care.
What issue? What is your problem? It is not your business what other people choose to do if it doesn't harm you.

Whether or not you ''give a shit'' changes absolutely nothing for the dead people, no matter where they are. So why give it a second thought when thought does nothing?
 
#15 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

sadly, yes. especially if you're white. western media will do anything to protect the lives of white people. hence why conflicts in latin america, asia and africa are generally barely covered (in great part because the western interests are the cause of these troubles more often than not).
 
#16 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

sadly, yes. especially if you're white. western media will do anything to protect the lives of white people.
The media protects lives? And only white people? WOW. Good to know. If I get in trouble I won't call 911 for help, I'll call Wolf Blitzer.

Or are you just campaigning? If so give it a rest, you are already seeded high.
 
#21 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Perhaps in light of todays bombings discussion on this issue of media coverage could continue in this thread out of respect for the Boston victims.
 
#23 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

good bump.

3 westerners die in boston and everyone is acting as if the world is gonna end. at least there's no bush around or another middle eastern nation would be invaded
:hug: I remember how I and so many in my country and people around the world hung for days and weeks in breathless concern and suspense when Chileans and Bolivians were trapped deep in a mine and cried tears of joy when they were rescued. Their lives were important to me and to my countrymen,.

I also know that there have been recent mine disasters in this country that you never knew or cared about, Does that make the lives of the Chilean miners more important? No, of course not. It is simply the circumstance that causes the publicity, Just as you or most anybody doesn't know about the two people found dead here in the park or the man thrown in the river. It doesn't make their lives less important.

I think you know this already. But this is an occasion where you can give vent to your feelings and you use it for those purposes. I'm not surprised anymore than I'm surprised to learn that there were expressions of glee and mirth posted on MTF after learning that people had been killed and permanently maimed in the U.S.
 
#24 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Fact is media is about What people want to hear/read/watch. What is so hard to understand about that? Some examples were given here, like the Myanmar disaster, well truth is a lot of people living in Europe, the US and the so called "western countries" don't even know Myanmar is a country! Is the ignorance sad to witness? Yes, but there is no way around it.

Does the media think westerners lives are more valuable? Of course not! :facepalm: Believing that takes even greater ignorance...
 
#25 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

[IRONY]
I think this is getting more coverage than Breivik. There are school shootings with many more victims that get less coverage. The Western media is biased against Western media.:rolleyes:
[/IRONY]

Seriously now, the minute the press will be safe in countries like Iraq, Angola, Syria or Afghanistan, they will account for the atrocities that are surely taking place there. The impact of events is always greater in places where people think it's safe. If tomorrow morning, Notre Dame of Paris is bombed, it would count more than Afghanistan. Yes, of course it's unfair, but that's the way our "modern" society works. Never to build, always to destroy, no matter who we talk about as "The Destroyer". When people start dying in safe places, people always wonder "Where is safe? Where can we live in peace?"
 
#27 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Seriously now, the minute the press will be safe in countries like Iraq, Angola, Syria or Afghanistan, they will account for the atrocities that are surely taking place there.
I don't think it's got to do with safety in those countries.
If you look for it, you can find good news reports from those "unsafe" countries. Those news reports are there, they just don't get as much attention.

I think it's more habit and what people get used to seeing. People are used to hearing about Afghanistan, Syria, etc. So, the impact of such news items is not as big as the impact of 2 explosions during a marathon which isn't exactly an expected event, unlike attacks in Syria for example.
 
#26 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

"I wish that people who are conventionally supposed to love each other would say to each other, when they fight, "Please — a little less love, and a little more common decency."
 
#31 · (Edited)
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

The reason why 9/11 had a bigger impact than the attacks in London and Madrid (and they were huge, they should not be diminshed) is because the 9/11 was on US soil. Let me try to explain what I mean.

The USA had not seen war or such a vicious attack from a foreign entity on US soil. It was a first.

The UK had experienced IRA attacks in recent history. Spain had experienced ETA attacks in recent history.

The fact that 9/11 got more attention had to do, in part, with people being shocked that the USA was no longer a safe haven. Not that some people didn't realise that, the government has taken quite a few measures to increase safety but 9/11 made it real, it brought it home.

People in the UK and in Spain didn't need reminding. The scars of terrorist attacks are still fresh. People were used to a thing or two there.
 
#32 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

The fact that 9/11 got more attention had to do, in part, with people being shocked that the USA was no longer a safe haven. Not that some people didn't realise that, the government has taken quite a few measures to increase safety but 9/11 made it real.
So now, how is this different from what I said earlier:

When people start dying in safe places, people always wonder "Where is safe? Where can we live in peace?"
 
#36 ·
#45 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Prove I am wrong.
How are lives in the Western world more important than others? From what standpoint are you analysing this? Economically? Politically? Complete trite. Eastern Asia and many countries in Africa are now the economic backbone for the global economy, and becoming more politically instrumental by the year, hence why Obama is looking for economic relations there (mostly in an imperialistic manner). China will be the inarguable superpower in the next fifty years, as will India, possibly. Israel have vast influence on America's political infrastructure, too, and most of their corporations, and it was only 25-30 years ago they were considered second-world.

Essentially, no lives are more important than others. It's a complete fabrication and a skewed argument. The Western media tend to ignore many world events, whether it be the Syrian Uprising, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, North Korean political prison camps, the Islamic Sharia movement, the tensions in Pakistan where US drones have malfunctioned and dropped on innocent civilians etc. On the other side, media in the Middle East or Eastern Asia don't cover Western events as extensively.

48 hours ago there was an explosion in Iraq killing 33 people and injuring over 300. The Western media did not cover this at all. The Bosten Marathon consisted of 3 deaths and over 100 injuries and it got extensive, national coverage. This is expected. The Western media report primarily on first-world countries because most of their viewers are, in fact, from the first-world. They create the illusion that "we are all that matters".

The media today is a prime example of corporate, encumbered capitalism. It's about viewership, drama and bias, not reporting world events objectively. It's serving as arguably one of the most dysfunctional instituions in our public framework. This is why many people are now getting their information from independent outlets - some of which being non-for-profit.

Your post is imperious. It suggets that only the first-world counts because the media spawn such a disillusionment. It's amazing how media can completely distort one's reality. It honestly feels as if it is part of an agenda, to almost subdue the citizens of a nation and let them know that "we only count".
 
#43 · (Edited)
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

What some people do not seem to understand is that we in the west can choose what media we want to read from just about anywhere in the world. If we want to read Granma, we can. But while we are reading it we should remember that the Cubans only have Granma. For myself, I would not bother to read it. And for some reason I am not compelled to whine about the bias in its reporting. Let those who want to read it, read it.

Complaining about media bias is like complaining that your local supermarket has too much vanilla ice cream on the shelves and not enough pecan. If you ask why there is not more pecan, they manager will probably tell you that vanilla outsells pecan.

I think the problem with those that whine about media bias is that it makes them uncomfortable that the press is free, when it really should be controlled.
 
#53 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

hopefully but probably not the case which is stupid.

point:you value your life and your family more than others would ever do...
everything else is bullshit and hypocrisy.
 
#65 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Well, power too - far more people have heard/know what CNN or BBC is, than what's top portal in Iran or Pakistan. Not to mention that even if you're not from the West, your 2nd language is most likely to be English, so again more power to Western media. If you would want to hear all bits and pieces about whatever that happened in (for example) Serbia, you would definitely need to know Serbian language, otherwise you would have to depend on the info either from Western media or from Serbian media available in English, which is usually far less detailed than the native version.
 
#70 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

I don't read American papers or watch American tv because I don't care about American daily events. But since so many movies take place in these famous USA places I am interested when something happens there.

If you are not interested why seek out western media stories?
 
#73 ·
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

western press report more about western issues shocker

of course this is true.
 
#78 · (Edited)
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

western press report more about western issues shocker

of course this is true.
This self-centerdness is typical towards the end of the decadence life-cycle. The day the audience (market) takes an interest in "darkest" africa, is the day the media will give them exactly that. Celebrity news and reality TV is today's news. This perpetuates the cycle of ignorance. Our masses are truly ignorant. It is scary. No wonder we are easy pickings for the elite.

Despite my dad's insistence (with tantrums and throwing of furniture), I don't think CNN is entirely a fascistic tool of western/corporate imperialism. Maybe not entirely. And there is a plethora of different media one can consume, especially in the internet age. Problem is that people do not care about what happens outside of their immediate communities anymore. They will care once everything is taken from them though, as is happening in the USA right now.
 
#95 · (Edited)
Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

about the topic, well in here i hear alot of news about the USA and Europe, only in dramatic cases i see news report about asia, AO, south/center america or africa.
of course everyday about the middle east.

theres different shows who tell news about diffrent places same goes for the news in the sites.
from europe i hear mostly about the UK.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top