5 ms·

Can someone explain why when the Evergiven blocked the Suez canal for a few days the news reported it with such catastrophistic tones but now that the canal is

Can someone explain why when the Evergiven blocked the Suez canal for a few days the news reported it with such catastrophistic tones but now that the canal is effectively blocked by Iran-backed forces nobody screams about a global crisis?

asylteltine 3y ago
[flagged]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
tiltowait 3y ago
Maybe the realization that it didn't lead to End Times back then, so such hystrionics this time around would be met with great rolling of eyes?
burkaman 3y ago
I don't remember the catastrophic tones, but I would guess there was heavier coverage for the Ever Given incident because several hundred container ships were effectively stuck until that was resolved. In this case nothing is stuck, ships are just taking a slower route. It's the difference between "Atlanta Airport shut down indefinitely, all flights cancelled until further notice" and "Bad weather in Atlanta, all flights delayed". Both are newsworthy, but the latter doesn't generate as many headlines. Not to downplay the violence in the Red Sea, obviously it's a lot more serious than bad weather, but I think the analogy is ok.
- serf 3y ago
  > In this case nothing is stuck, ships are just taking a slower route. that might be what parent is mentioning : this alternative route was sold to the news-viewing public as absolutely impossible and untenable when producing profit over time -- they were told that the suez canal was of vital importance and that trade must halt until it was cleared. and now suddenly, not much time afterwards, the threat of violence has prompted the realization that there are clear and viable alternatives to the suez canal. the 180 on the importance of the canal feels telling, but I don't know how. I presume it's an effort to keep public opinion from desiring a strong military response in the area. It feels like election-time stalling so that "Cleaning up the Red Sea" can be a political talking point during election season -- but I hate to be so cynical as to think we're ignoring a global political partner for the sake of a politician having an ace up their sleeve during debates.
  - burkaman 3y ago
    I really have to disagree, I'm not sure your memory is representative of the coverage most people saw. I'm looking at the New York Times, which I think is a good example of mainstream US news. While the Ever Given was stuck, they reported stuff like: > With each day that the Ever Given container ship remains stuck in the Suez Canal, the cost of the disruption grows more consequential. After days of failed efforts to move the mammoth ship, shipowners began rerouting ships bound for the Suez Canal around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope, adding weeks to their journeys and burning additional fuel — a cost ultimately borne by consumers. When deciding whether to divert, a shipping company must consider the cost of sitting for days outside the canal versus the added time of steaming around Africa. It is not an easy choice. Today the Red Sea crisis is front page news, and their story leads with: > They can send their vessels through the Red Sea if they are willing to risk attacks by the Houthi militia in Yemen and to bear the cost of sharply higher insurance premiums. Or they can sail an extra 4,000 miles around Africa, adding 10 days in each direction and burning considerably more fuel. Neither option is appealing and both raise costs — expenses that analysts said could ultimately be borne by consumers through higher prices on the goods they buy. Basically the same, even using the exact same phrase about consumers. This was just one example, but when I look at coverage of Ever Given I see a general attitude of "damn this is terrible timing, supply chains were just starting to recover from the pandemic, this will cause a lot of problems". Nobody was declaring the end of the world or that "trade must halt". Today I don't see anyone downplaying the situation, at most I see a little bit less front-page placement because of the nature of the story.
DoughnutHole 3y ago
It was an entertaining story that could be followed minute-by-minute. It was funny that a single ship could get stuck with such a huge impact on the global shipping industry, so people were tuned in. And you could follow day by day with the plans and attempts made to dig out the ship. Great, simple fodder for the 24-hour news cycle, and memes probably made people more engaged with the story. With the Houthis it's a big, complex geopolitical mess, and all the oxygen in the room is being taken up by the war in Gaza. No big countermoves have been made so all there is to be done is report on the strikes when they happen, the threats made by various powers, and speculate if the US is going to intervene in some significant way. The Ever Given was an acute issue, and acute issues are attention grabbing. The attacks in the Red Sea are a progression of a war that the average person in the west doesn't really understand that's been going on for 9 years.
- rcpt 3y ago
  https://defector.com/big-boat-stuck-a-story https://defector.com/big-boat-stuck-a-story One of my favorites
krisoft 3y ago
> but now that the canal is effectively blocked by Iran-backed forces nobody screams about a global crisis Not sure about what sources you follow, but the ones I am following scream about a full blown global crisis. Here is for example the explainer from the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/19/red-sea-shipping-crisis-bp-oil-explained-what-is-happening-and-what-does-it-mean-for-global-trade https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/19/red-sea-shi... At the same time many defence analyst is astonished by the appearent dithering of the US Navy over the issue. In fact the more fringe elements are talking about that the recent incapacitation of the US SecDef might be the reason behind the inaction.
skywhopper 3y ago
The hook with the Evergiven was that the ship had run aground and couldn't get out. That was fun and relatable, it was a single event, there were pictures. It was reported on by everyone when the event happened and the rest of the coverage was followup coverage. The "omg is global trade ending" pieces didn't happen right away. The situation here is much harder for the press to explain, has been going back and forth for a couple of weeks at least now (ie not tied to a single specific event with pictures), and is relatively new. The "omg" pieces will come out in a couple of weeks if this continues, don't worry.
galdosdi 3y ago
I don't recall catastrophic tones, nor do I think the current houthi situation is being underplayed. I think you and I subscribe to different media sources and this is your warning sign that yours are too sensationalistic.
paxys 3y ago
Have you been reading the new for the last 3 months? There is nothing but "GLOBAL CRISIS" splashed all over the front page.
throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
"Big Boat blocked lanes, so many shipz waiting, lolz, oh noes!" vs "Shipping transit rerouted around African cape, prices might increase in a few months" If it's not entertaining nobody gives a crap
grenouille932 3y ago
Because the Suez canal is not actually blocked this time. Many ships of all types (container, cargo, tankers, etc.) are going through.
elzbardico 3y ago
People are already horrified with the Israeli state actions in Gaza, linking this to rising prices would not contribute to the political goals of the current administration on this conflict.

asylteltine 3y ago

[flagged]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

tiltowait 3y ago

Maybe the realization that it didn't lead to End Times back then, so such hystrionics this time around would be met with great rolling of eyes?

burkaman 3y ago

I don't remember the catastrophic tones, but I would guess there was heavier coverage for the Ever Given incident because several hundred container ships were effectively stuck until that was resolved. In this case nothing is stuck, ships are just taking a slower route. It's the difference between "Atlanta Airport shut down indefinitely, all flights cancelled until further notice" and "Bad weather in Atlanta, all flights delayed". Both are newsworthy, but the latter doesn't generate as many headlines. Not to downplay the violence in the Red Sea, obviously it's a lot more serious than bad weather, but I think the analogy is ok.

serf 3y ago
> In this case nothing is stuck, ships are just taking a slower route. that might be what parent is mentioning : this alternative route was sold to the news-viewing public as absolutely impossible and untenable when producing profit over time -- they were told that the suez canal was of vital importance and that trade must halt until it was cleared. and now suddenly, not much time afterwards, the threat of violence has prompted the realization that there are clear and viable alternatives to the suez canal. the 180 on the importance of the canal feels telling, but I don't know how. I presume it's an effort to keep public opinion from desiring a strong military response in the area. It feels like election-time stalling so that "Cleaning up the Red Sea" can be a political talking point during election season -- but I hate to be so cynical as to think we're ignoring a global political partner for the sake of a politician having an ace up their sleeve during debates.
- burkaman 3y ago
  I really have to disagree, I'm not sure your memory is representative of the coverage most people saw. I'm looking at the New York Times, which I think is a good example of mainstream US news. While the Ever Given was stuck, they reported stuff like: > With each day that the Ever Given container ship remains stuck in the Suez Canal, the cost of the disruption grows more consequential. After days of failed efforts to move the mammoth ship, shipowners began rerouting ships bound for the Suez Canal around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope, adding weeks to their journeys and burning additional fuel — a cost ultimately borne by consumers. When deciding whether to divert, a shipping company must consider the cost of sitting for days outside the canal versus the added time of steaming around Africa. It is not an easy choice. Today the Red Sea crisis is front page news, and their story leads with: > They can send their vessels through the Red Sea if they are willing to risk attacks by the Houthi militia in Yemen and to bear the cost of sharply higher insurance premiums. Or they can sail an extra 4,000 miles around Africa, adding 10 days in each direction and burning considerably more fuel. Neither option is appealing and both raise costs — expenses that analysts said could ultimately be borne by consumers through higher prices on the goods they buy. Basically the same, even using the exact same phrase about consumers. This was just one example, but when I look at coverage of Ever Given I see a general attitude of "damn this is terrible timing, supply chains were just starting to recover from the pandemic, this will cause a lot of problems". Nobody was declaring the end of the world or that "trade must halt". Today I don't see anyone downplaying the situation, at most I see a little bit less front-page placement because of the nature of the story.

DoughnutHole 3y ago

It was an entertaining story that could be followed minute-by-minute. It was funny that a single ship could get stuck with such a huge impact on the global shipping industry, so people were tuned in. And you could follow day by day with the plans and attempts made to dig out the ship. Great, simple fodder for the 24-hour news cycle, and memes probably made people more engaged with the story. With the Houthis it's a big, complex geopolitical mess, and all the oxygen in the room is being taken up by the war in Gaza. No big countermoves have been made so all there is to be done is report on the strikes when they happen, the threats made by various powers, and speculate if the US is going to intervene in some significant way. The Ever Given was an acute issue, and acute issues are attention grabbing. The attacks in the Red Sea are a progression of a war that the average person in the west doesn't really understand that's been going on for 9 years.

rcpt 3y ago
https://defector.com/big-boat-stuck-a-story https://defector.com/big-boat-stuck-a-story One of my favorites

krisoft 3y ago

> but now that the canal is effectively blocked by Iran-backed forces nobody screams about a global crisis Not sure about what sources you follow, but the ones I am following scream about a full blown global crisis. Here is for example the explainer from the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/19/red-sea-shipping-crisis-bp-oil-explained-what-is-happening-and-what-does-it-mean-for-global-trade https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/19/red-sea-shi... At the same time many defence analyst is astonished by the appearent dithering of the US Navy over the issue. In fact the more fringe elements are talking about that the recent incapacitation of the US SecDef might be the reason behind the inaction.

skywhopper 3y ago

The hook with the Evergiven was that the ship had run aground and couldn't get out. That was fun and relatable, it was a single event, there were pictures. It was reported on by everyone when the event happened and the rest of the coverage was followup coverage. The "omg is global trade ending" pieces didn't happen right away. The situation here is much harder for the press to explain, has been going back and forth for a couple of weeks at least now (ie not tied to a single specific event with pictures), and is relatively new. The "omg" pieces will come out in a couple of weeks if this continues, don't worry.

galdosdi 3y ago

I don't recall catastrophic tones, nor do I think the current houthi situation is being underplayed. I think you and I subscribe to different media sources and this is your warning sign that yours are too sensationalistic.

paxys 3y ago

Have you been reading the new for the last 3 months? There is nothing but "GLOBAL CRISIS" splashed all over the front page.

throwawaaarrgh 3y ago

"Big Boat blocked lanes, so many shipz waiting, lolz, oh noes!" vs "Shipping transit rerouted around African cape, prices might increase in a few months" If it's not entertaining nobody gives a crap

grenouille932 3y ago

Because the Suez canal is not actually blocked this time. Many ships of all types (container, cargo, tankers, etc.) are going through.

elzbardico 3y ago

People are already horrified with the Israeli state actions in Gaza, linking this to rising prices would not contribute to the political goals of the current administration on this conflict.