4 ms·

It's somewhat interesting how much attention these kids have received, meanwhile how many kids have died worldwide from hunger, disease, and warfare since June

It's somewhat interesting how much attention these kids have received, meanwhile how many kids have died worldwide from hunger, disease, and warfare since June 23rd? Probably a bit more than 12. I guess that's not as exciting to read about though.

throwawayjava 8y ago
Short term problems need short term solutions and benefit (from) short attention spans. Long term problems need long term solutions and benefit from longer attention spans. Your reminder to think about those problems is well taken. But, aside from heeding your reminder, I'm okay with this.
mdorazio 8y ago
I made a lot of family members really mad yesterday by saying exactly this. Then I looked up some stats. The numbers are a few years out of date, but UNICEF estimates that 29,000 children under the age of five die of preventable causes every day [1]. And those kids didn't do anything wrong to get themselves a death sentence. Now ask yourself how many of those kids could have been saved with the amount of money, manpower, and attention being devoted to the Thai soccer team. Stuff like this gets pretty sad if you think about it in utilitarian terms. [1] https://www.unicef.org/mdg/childmortality.html https://www.unicef.org/mdg/childmortality.html
- triviatise 8y ago
  the same goes for any social problem you help solve. People are quite upset about kids getting separated from parents at the border. Yet offer no help for the thousands of children that die every day. Every person decides what cause is important to them. The hypocrisy is when people who favor one cause judge those who arent interested in that cause.
  - curiousgal 8y ago
    I am not fishing for drama but I want to speak my mind. On that note, the most blatant form of hypocrisy in my opinion is pro-"life" supporters whose main argument is "think of the children" yet they also ignore the thousands of children that die every day.
    - radiantswirl 8y ago
      Those children aren't being systematically murdered with the full support of the government tho. I'm pro-choice I'm just saying its not fair to compare abortion to child deaths in general.
      - curiousgal 8y ago
        >Those children aren't being systematically murdered with the full support of the government tho. Wars kill children.
        pitt1980 8y ago
        If your moral worldview doesn't equate those effected by abortion as valueless clumps of cells, The moral scale of legalized abortion dwarfs that of modern wars -------- Between 1945 and 1992, there were 149 major wars, killing more than 23 million people. ... Recent developments in warfare have significantly heightened the dangers for children. During the last decade, it is estimated (and these figures, while specific, are necessarily orders of magnitude) that child victims have included: 2 million killed; 4-5 million disabled; 12 million left homeless; more than 1 million orphaned or separated from their parents; some 10 million psychologically traumatized.4 https://www.unicef.org/sowc96/1cinwar.htm https://www.unicef.org/sowc96/1cinwar.htm There have been more than 45 million abortions just in the US since Roe v Wade https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_U... ------- ------- ------- I'm guessing that's not your moral world view, but for the sake of understanding the people you disagree with, you should realize that they view legalized abortion as one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, which easily outweighs most other issues that we squabble about. (And yeah, justifies teaming up with otherwise unsavory bedfellows)
- mac01021 8y ago
  Why did they get so mad?
danso 8y ago
It's not just about excitement.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  Yea, it kind of is. If it were, you know, about the children, then you may expect more attention to the bigger problems that kill far more children.
- cup-of-tea 8y ago
  It really is. I guarantee the film is already in the works.
  - geomark 8y ago
    I've seen reports that locals are already preparing for disaster tourism to the area once the situation is resolved.
  - TomMarius 8y ago
    Of course, how else would you get real footage.
shripadk 8y ago
I don't think it's about excitement. It's just that what happened was so unusual that it captured everyone's imagination. It reminds me of an incident that happened in India probably a decade ago when a child fell into a open borewell. It was broadcast live for 2 full days until the child was rescued. But that wasn't the end of it. From then on, many children have fallen into open borewells but have never received the same amount of coverage. I guess it has more to do with viewers getting accustomed to such stories that it becomes "just another news headline". But that doesn't mean mankind is insensitive to suffering. It just so happens that none of us can do anything about it even if we wished to. > meanwhile how many kids have died worldwide from hunger, disease, and warfare since June 23rd? Probably a bit more than 12. I guess that's not as exciting to read about though. Food for thought: there are probably a few million stars dying everyday wiping out possible civilizations and life we may never know about. I guess at some point we need to stop looking at statistics and instead focus on fixing what is possible.
- MperorM 8y ago
  A single individual can do much if they want to. more than 400,000 people die each year from malaria alone, a disease easily preventable by buying cheap mosquito nets. If you donated just 10% of your income each month, you'd be able to save many lives each year. https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/myths-about-aid/ https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/myths-about-aid... Dispels the most commonly held incorrect beliefs about charities.
  - shripadk 8y ago
    It's not giving that's the problem. The problem is in misuse of the donations. Your link does classify it as a myth but I live in a developing country and I can attest to the fact that most aid money donated by Western society either gets misused or swindled unless it's through proper channels. Finding proper channels is not as easy as you think. Even reputed organizations have been caught misusing funds: (1) https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/foreign-funding-of-ngos-comes-down-sharply-in-2016-17-after-crackdown/articleshow/62186877.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/foreign-funding-of... (2) https://www.oneindia.com/india/crackdown-on-fcra-violation-ngo-receiving-foreign-funds-must-open-accounts-in-these-banks-2608961.html https://www.oneindia.com/india/crackdown-on-fcra-violation-n... (3) https://www.socialpost.news/national/modi-govt-cancels-licences-14000-ngos-crackdown-foreign-funding/ https://www.socialpost.news/national/modi-govt-cancels-licen... If you truly are a "noble charitable cause" then there is no reason to hide your source of funding. Majority of these NGOs (Charities are classified as Non-Governmental Organizations in India) haven't filed their annual returns since their inception. So basically it's unaccounted dollars free-flowing into the country with no mention of source or the purpose for the donations. It could very well be money-laundering or for other ulterior motives. That can only be dispelled if the NGOs filed their annual returns just like every other organization. But the fact that they refused to do it, inspite of it being clearly laid down in law, shows ill-intent. You can't eat your cake and have it too.
shafyy 8y ago
It's also an interesting event, and media broadcast interesting things because people like to read about interesting things. Pretty straightforward, no?
Joeri 8y ago
News is by definition something new, not common, unusual. It's weighted for novelty, not significance. That means that the usual misery either doesn't make the news at all, or only gets a mention in passing, and even if some news agency were to put the usual misery front and center, people would tune out because "I already know that".
IkmoIkmo 8y ago
Yes, it's pretty sad. For example, mortality under five worldwide: https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/U5MR_deaths_2017.xls https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/U5MR_deat... From about 12.5 million, about 25 years ago, to 5.5 million. Or about 200 thousand children in the past two weeks, most of them due to preventable causes that require better infrastructure, logistics, institutional capacity and resources to solve. The solutions are not trivial, but are not complex either. Of course there is massive institutional attention for these issues (which is in part why the number of deaths per year has dropped by about 7 million children, akin to preventing a deadly outcome equivalent to the holocaust every year), but the share of popular media attention is a tiny fraction, probably a rounding error. This just feels like another Kony2012. That's not to say the efforts should not take place. But it is to say that it's once again confirmed that parts of journalism are a complete joke and part of its raison d'etre is providing for those with a fetish for digital disaster tourism, whether it's this or helicopter views of a police car chase. It like putting the real in reality tv. But it's not what journalists say they are, or how media companies describe themselves as.

throwawayjava 8y ago

Short term problems need short term solutions and benefit (from) short attention spans. Long term problems need long term solutions and benefit from longer attention spans. Your reminder to think about those problems is well taken. But, aside from heeding your reminder, I'm okay with this.

mdorazio 8y ago

I made a lot of family members really mad yesterday by saying exactly this. Then I looked up some stats. The numbers are a few years out of date, but UNICEF estimates that 29,000 children under the age of five die of preventable causes every day [1]. And those kids didn't do anything wrong to get themselves a death sentence. Now ask yourself how many of those kids could have been saved with the amount of money, manpower, and attention being devoted to the Thai soccer team. Stuff like this gets pretty sad if you think about it in utilitarian terms. [1] https://www.unicef.org/mdg/childmortality.html https://www.unicef.org/mdg/childmortality.html

triviatise 8y ago
the same goes for any social problem you help solve. People are quite upset about kids getting separated from parents at the border. Yet offer no help for the thousands of children that die every day. Every person decides what cause is important to them. The hypocrisy is when people who favor one cause judge those who arent interested in that cause.
- curiousgal 8y ago
  I am not fishing for drama but I want to speak my mind. On that note, the most blatant form of hypocrisy in my opinion is pro-"life" supporters whose main argument is "think of the children" yet they also ignore the thousands of children that die every day.
  - radiantswirl 8y ago
    Those children aren't being systematically murdered with the full support of the government tho. I'm pro-choice I'm just saying its not fair to compare abortion to child deaths in general.
    - curiousgal 8y ago
      >Those children aren't being systematically murdered with the full support of the government tho. Wars kill children.
      - pitt1980 8y ago
        If your moral worldview doesn't equate those effected by abortion as valueless clumps of cells, The moral scale of legalized abortion dwarfs that of modern wars -------- Between 1945 and 1992, there were 149 major wars, killing more than 23 million people. ... Recent developments in warfare have significantly heightened the dangers for children. During the last decade, it is estimated (and these figures, while specific, are necessarily orders of magnitude) that child victims have included: 2 million killed; 4-5 million disabled; 12 million left homeless; more than 1 million orphaned or separated from their parents; some 10 million psychologically traumatized.4 https://www.unicef.org/sowc96/1cinwar.htm https://www.unicef.org/sowc96/1cinwar.htm There have been more than 45 million abortions just in the US since Roe v Wade https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_U... ------- ------- ------- I'm guessing that's not your moral world view, but for the sake of understanding the people you disagree with, you should realize that they view legalized abortion as one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, which easily outweighs most other issues that we squabble about. (And yeah, justifies teaming up with otherwise unsavory bedfellows)
mac01021 8y ago
Why did they get so mad?

danso 8y ago

It's not just about excitement.

craftyguy 8y ago
Yea, it kind of is. If it were, you know, about the children, then you may expect more attention to the bigger problems that kill far more children.
cup-of-tea 8y ago
It really is. I guarantee the film is already in the works.
- geomark 8y ago
  I've seen reports that locals are already preparing for disaster tourism to the area once the situation is resolved.
- TomMarius 8y ago
  Of course, how else would you get real footage.

shripadk 8y ago

I don't think it's about excitement. It's just that what happened was so unusual that it captured everyone's imagination. It reminds me of an incident that happened in India probably a decade ago when a child fell into a open borewell. It was broadcast live for 2 full days until the child was rescued. But that wasn't the end of it. From then on, many children have fallen into open borewells but have never received the same amount of coverage. I guess it has more to do with viewers getting accustomed to such stories that it becomes "just another news headline". But that doesn't mean mankind is insensitive to suffering. It just so happens that none of us can do anything about it even if we wished to. > meanwhile how many kids have died worldwide from hunger, disease, and warfare since June 23rd? Probably a bit more than 12. I guess that's not as exciting to read about though. Food for thought: there are probably a few million stars dying everyday wiping out possible civilizations and life we may never know about. I guess at some point we need to stop looking at statistics and instead focus on fixing what is possible.

MperorM 8y ago
A single individual can do much if they want to. more than 400,000 people die each year from malaria alone, a disease easily preventable by buying cheap mosquito nets. If you donated just 10% of your income each month, you'd be able to save many lives each year. https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/myths-about-aid/ https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/myths-about-aid... Dispels the most commonly held incorrect beliefs about charities.
- shripadk 8y ago
  It's not giving that's the problem. The problem is in misuse of the donations. Your link does classify it as a myth but I live in a developing country and I can attest to the fact that most aid money donated by Western society either gets misused or swindled unless it's through proper channels. Finding proper channels is not as easy as you think. Even reputed organizations have been caught misusing funds: (1) https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/foreign-funding-of-ngos-comes-down-sharply-in-2016-17-after-crackdown/articleshow/62186877.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/foreign-funding-of... (2) https://www.oneindia.com/india/crackdown-on-fcra-violation-ngo-receiving-foreign-funds-must-open-accounts-in-these-banks-2608961.html https://www.oneindia.com/india/crackdown-on-fcra-violation-n... (3) https://www.socialpost.news/national/modi-govt-cancels-licences-14000-ngos-crackdown-foreign-funding/ https://www.socialpost.news/national/modi-govt-cancels-licen... If you truly are a "noble charitable cause" then there is no reason to hide your source of funding. Majority of these NGOs (Charities are classified as Non-Governmental Organizations in India) haven't filed their annual returns since their inception. So basically it's unaccounted dollars free-flowing into the country with no mention of source or the purpose for the donations. It could very well be money-laundering or for other ulterior motives. That can only be dispelled if the NGOs filed their annual returns just like every other organization. But the fact that they refused to do it, inspite of it being clearly laid down in law, shows ill-intent. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

shafyy 8y ago

It's also an interesting event, and media broadcast interesting things because people like to read about interesting things. Pretty straightforward, no?

Joeri 8y ago

News is by definition something new, not common, unusual. It's weighted for novelty, not significance. That means that the usual misery either doesn't make the news at all, or only gets a mention in passing, and even if some news agency were to put the usual misery front and center, people would tune out because "I already know that".

IkmoIkmo 8y ago

Yes, it's pretty sad. For example, mortality under five worldwide: https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/U5MR_deaths_2017.xls https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/U5MR_deat... From about 12.5 million, about 25 years ago, to 5.5 million. Or about 200 thousand children in the past two weeks, most of them due to preventable causes that require better infrastructure, logistics, institutional capacity and resources to solve. The solutions are not trivial, but are not complex either. Of course there is massive institutional attention for these issues (which is in part why the number of deaths per year has dropped by about 7 million children, akin to preventing a deadly outcome equivalent to the holocaust every year), but the share of popular media attention is a tiny fraction, probably a rounding error. This just feels like another Kony2012. That's not to say the efforts should not take place. But it is to say that it's once again confirmed that parts of journalism are a complete joke and part of its raison d'etre is providing for those with a fetish for digital disaster tourism, whether it's this or helicopter views of a police car chase. It like putting the real in reality tv. But it's not what journalists say they are, or how media companies describe themselves as.