3 ms·

Unfortunately you see the same disregard when looking horizontally across the globe. The death of an American is almost always given considerably more American

by uptown 10y ago

Unfortunately you see the same disregard when looking horizontally across the globe. The death of an American is almost always given considerably more American media coverage than the regular atrocities taking place in other countries. Should proximity make what has happened any more or less significant?

2bitencryption 10y ago
> Should proximity make what has happened any more or less significant? Yes, in the eyes of those further away.
libria 10y ago
Or generically "The death of a local is almost always given considerably more local media coverage than the regular atrocities taking place in foreign countries." Of course proximity matters. With absolutely no judgement on the victims, I'd rather have updated news about a serial killer in my neighborhood as opposed to one in Germany.
- slyall 10y ago
  News about street maintenance in my neighborhood is more important to me than some serial killer on the other side of the world. How would the serial killer affect my life? Would my life even be better after having read details of his grisly crimes (probably not)?. On the other hand if parking will be forbidden on near my house for a day while they re-surface the street it is something that will actually affect me.
- lostlogin 10y ago
  I'm guessing you are American and in the US? Here in New Zealand the death of an American gets just about as much airtime as the death of a local. Your news matters way more than any other country's news. It seems to be a combination of who owns the news outlet and the strange media hysteria that outlets foster when something tragic/gross/unusual happens.
sushid 10y ago
But closeness (in relation, geographically, or even in time) to those affected affect how you feel about their deaths. It's because their death probably affects your life more. It'd be absurd for one to lament the death of every national equally, or for you to mourn the loss of those from Boston Massacre to Boston Marathon bombing equally.
- uptown 10y ago
  So if given the choice to save a hundred strangers one state away or a thousand strangers in Sudan, which would you choose?
ChuckMcM 10y ago
All politics (and all news) is "local".
icebraining 10y ago
https://youtu.be/QKboodmEHTQ?t=4m20s https://youtu.be/QKboodmEHTQ?t=4m20s
venomsnake 10y ago
How dare the American media and the American public be more concerned about their own? Yes proximity matters a lot. Now - if lets say Elbonian media was more concerned with American lives than Elbonian ones - it would be a valid critic. Also - one of the cornerstones of the world order is that whatever a country does in its internal affair is their own business. To have a person care for you is a privilege, not a right.
- lostlogin 10y ago
  "To have a person care for you is a privilege, not a right." It's a right here in New Zealand. We have laws on it any everything.
  - venomsnake 10y ago
    I don't think there is law that states a new Zealander should care about south sudan.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Retra 10y ago
If something is significant, then proximity won't matter -- so if you're even asking that question, you're only asking it about the insignificant things.
- uptown 10y ago
  Estimates place the death toll from the conflict in Syria at about half a million, but your evening newscast likely caps each night's broadcast off with a puff piece about a found dog that had gone missing, or some good deed a local middle-school kid did for his neighbor. If that same slaughter were happening in your home-town, do you think it'd be significant? Don't you still think it's more significant than the puff piece even though it's happening on the other side of the planet? It's certainly easier to ignore things that are further from our field of view, but I don't think it makes them any less significant unless each person ignores the larger world around them.
  - Retra 10y ago
    And Mao Zedong killed maybe 70 million people. Significance is not an objective universal measure. Those deaths in Syria are insignificant. There are 8 Billion + people on this planet. Maybe they'd be significant if they were pandas or tigers or something. And that's a workable perspective.
    - lostlogin 10y ago
      > Those deaths in Syria are insignificant To you. And wow.
jimjimjim 10y ago
1) media is about money. 2) money is acquired by advertising or subscription. 3) ads or subscriptions need people to read/view and to continue to do that. 4) the best way to influence someone to do that is through emotions. 4) news articles are selected or spun in a way that instills/increases emotions in a targeted audience. 5) if someone in Tibet gets hit by a truck then it is unlikely to produce a reaction to someone in NY. 6) if the demographically relevant person is hit by a truck related to an already unfavorable organization outside an apartment building in NY then that will have a much more likely emotional response and so will be that much more likely to be reported. this applies to 99% of media, regardless of whether it is politics, crime or sports. tl;dr = money.

by uptown 10y ago

2bitencryption 10y ago

> Should proximity make what has happened any more or less significant? Yes, in the eyes of those further away.

libria 10y ago

Or generically "The death of a local is almost always given considerably more local media coverage than the regular atrocities taking place in foreign countries." Of course proximity matters. With absolutely no judgement on the victims, I'd rather have updated news about a serial killer in my neighborhood as opposed to one in Germany.

slyall 10y ago
News about street maintenance in my neighborhood is more important to me than some serial killer on the other side of the world. How would the serial killer affect my life? Would my life even be better after having read details of his grisly crimes (probably not)?. On the other hand if parking will be forbidden on near my house for a day while they re-surface the street it is something that will actually affect me.
lostlogin 10y ago
I'm guessing you are American and in the US? Here in New Zealand the death of an American gets just about as much airtime as the death of a local. Your news matters way more than any other country's news. It seems to be a combination of who owns the news outlet and the strange media hysteria that outlets foster when something tragic/gross/unusual happens.

sushid 10y ago

But closeness (in relation, geographically, or even in time) to those affected affect how you feel about their deaths. It's because their death probably affects your life more. It'd be absurd for one to lament the death of every national equally, or for you to mourn the loss of those from Boston Massacre to Boston Marathon bombing equally.

uptown 10y ago
So if given the choice to save a hundred strangers one state away or a thousand strangers in Sudan, which would you choose?

ChuckMcM 10y ago

All politics (and all news) is "local".

icebraining 10y ago

https://youtu.be/QKboodmEHTQ?t=4m20s https://youtu.be/QKboodmEHTQ?t=4m20s

venomsnake 10y ago

How dare the American media and the American public be more concerned about their own? Yes proximity matters a lot. Now - if lets say Elbonian media was more concerned with American lives than Elbonian ones - it would be a valid critic. Also - one of the cornerstones of the world order is that whatever a country does in its internal affair is their own business. To have a person care for you is a privilege, not a right.

lostlogin 10y ago
"To have a person care for you is a privilege, not a right." It's a right here in New Zealand. We have laws on it any everything.
- venomsnake 10y ago
  I don't think there is law that states a new Zealander should care about south sudan.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Retra 10y ago

If something is significant, then proximity won't matter -- so if you're even asking that question, you're only asking it about the insignificant things.

uptown 10y ago
Estimates place the death toll from the conflict in Syria at about half a million, but your evening newscast likely caps each night's broadcast off with a puff piece about a found dog that had gone missing, or some good deed a local middle-school kid did for his neighbor. If that same slaughter were happening in your home-town, do you think it'd be significant? Don't you still think it's more significant than the puff piece even though it's happening on the other side of the planet? It's certainly easier to ignore things that are further from our field of view, but I don't think it makes them any less significant unless each person ignores the larger world around them.
- Retra 10y ago
  And Mao Zedong killed maybe 70 million people. Significance is not an objective universal measure. Those deaths in Syria are insignificant. There are 8 Billion + people on this planet. Maybe they'd be significant if they were pandas or tigers or something. And that's a workable perspective.
  - lostlogin 10y ago
    > Those deaths in Syria are insignificant To you. And wow.

jimjimjim 10y ago

1) media is about money. 2) money is acquired by advertising or subscription. 3) ads or subscriptions need people to read/view and to continue to do that. 4) the best way to influence someone to do that is through emotions. 4) news articles are selected or spun in a way that instills/increases emotions in a targeted audience. 5) if someone in Tibet gets hit by a truck then it is unlikely to produce a reaction to someone in NY. 6) if the demographically relevant person is hit by a truck related to an already unfavorable organization outside an apartment building in NY then that will have a much more likely emotional response and so will be that much more likely to be reported. this applies to 99% of media, regardless of whether it is politics, crime or sports. tl;dr = money.