5 ms·
People give a shit now because it’s a major escalation with a nuclear power. That was not true with their invasion in Georgia or the previous incursions in Ukra
by yed 5y ago
People give a shit now because it’s a major escalation with a nuclear power. That was not true with their invasion in Georgia or the previous incursions in Ukraine. This is a genuinely newsworthy and alarming event, I’m not sure what you expect the media to do when things like this happen.
- daenz 5y agoThe Boy Who Cried Wolf comes to mind. When everything is an emergency, nothing is.
- ceejayoz 5y agoSomeone who always cries "sheep" and keeps asserting genuine issues are "just the flu" or "Russia won't invade" is similarly problematic.
- daenz 5y agoWhataboutism. The answer to one problem isn't to say "but what about this other problem." The problem we're discussing here is the endless fear porn on the news and social media.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThe post upthread asserted COVID and Ukraine were examples of "fear porn". You chimed in with "crying wolf" about emergencies. It's hardly whataboutism to point out that these are actual emergencies, and that media coverage of them should be expected.
- daenz 5y agoThat's the point of the "crying wolf" story: the boy cried wolf so many times, that when a wolf (emergency) actually appeared, the townsfolk response was not appropriate. That's the risk you run when every story is hyped up for maximum engagement.
- pixl97 5y agoThen you go about banning commercial news. Short of that don't expect anything to change. The risk the for profit news station runs by not hyping everything to the max is loss of profit. In the meantime there are many things in this world that have the potential to become very dangerous, but because people notice and do something about that, said terrible event doesn't happen.
- sjg007 5y agoThere are just active disinformation campaigns all over the place to do that. They want to overload our cognitive capacities to reason and find middle ground.
- yed 5y agoI think that's absolutely true when it comes to the media's treatment of past outbreaks, but that doesn't apply to the situation in Ukraine, it's the opposite. The mainstream did not take the threat of Russian aggression very seriously, even in Ukraine. Also the people pointing to the nuclear threat are urging calm, the opposite of your typical "boy who cried wolf" scenario.
- Mo3 5y agoSorry but you're trying to correlate unrelated concepts here. It still holds true that humanity has never been more informed about events in almost real-time. Sure the media wants to make profit, but that doesnt change the fact that a nuclear power is blowing up civilians right next to mainland Europe right now.
- atoav 5y agoNot pushing the break when you are driving directly into a wall at high velocity is not crying wolf, it is common sense. It is only comparable to crying wolf if there is no wall or if you are going so slow that you could just calmy reduce the speed instead of alarming people — if you are actually in control of the vehicle. If you are not in a car, but on a huge ship the wall can be further out and the speed can be lower and suddenly crying wolf becomes a high paid job. Climate change is like a big oil tanker: if we want to stop in 30 years we need to hit the break now. The nuclear crisis is different, because there is no clear defined path, but the risk of nuclear war is not zero.
- 8note 5y agoWhat's the escalation? The European and American responses to Russia? It's the media stoking those responses Otherwise, this is the same conflict escalation as russia's invasion of Georgia and annexation of crimea. It's not like Russia wasn't a nuclear power a few years ago