Mark C over at Daimnation gives post to what I was saying to some friends on the weekend. Why can hundreds of thousands die in Sudan, millions in Congo, Ethopia invade Somalia, etc (I encourage you to name other examples in the comments) and the collective reponse to 24 hour news channels is little more than a collective shrug but Israel and Hezbollah go at it again and everything must stop, immediate ceasefires must be called, UN peacekeepers must be assembled and every word spoken by every world leader is parsed and examined to squeeze every ounce of meaning. I mean to say, why the disproportional response?
« After having no positions for so long | Main | What would the Jays do without the White Sox? »
Proportionality
Comments are closed for this post.
Sponsors:
Powered by
Movable Type Personal 4.1
Movable Type Personal 4.1
Site Navigation
Search
(Powered by Google)
About
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on July 24, 2006 9:35 AM.
The previous post in this blog was After having no positions for so long.
The next post in this blog is What would the Jays do without the White Sox?.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
Comments (11)
If America was a staunch ally of Syria or Lebanon, the reaction might be slightly different.
Posted by Occam's Carbuncle | July 24, 2006 9:59 AM
Posted on July 24, 2006 09:59
Race cannot be ruled out as a factor.
Posted by Greg | July 24, 2006 10:35 AM
Posted on July 24, 2006 10:35
Although to be fair Greg, not everyone has been silent on Darfur.
http://search.ndp.ca/search/search.php?ps=10&ul=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ndp.ca&ln=en&org=ndp&q=Darfur&button.x=0&button.y=0
Posted by Greg | July 24, 2006 10:37 AM
Posted on July 24, 2006 10:37
Fatigue: No matter how much you cover Africa, nothing ever seems to change.
Business/Ratings: More viewers of Arab/Israeli heritage in Europe/N.America than those of African heritage in the coveted 19-54 demographics?
Resources: TV stations typically have more resources in the M/East because of Iraq, ongoing Palestinian-Israeli tensions, Iran, Syria, than Africa. It is also easier for TV stations to get feeds from M/East based affiliates. The troubled regions in Africa do not really have their own TV studios.
Mobilization: The Arab/Israeli/Muslim groups are better organizing than African groups in Europe & N.America.
Ownership: of major media companies in the world.
I am sure there are others.
Posted by cb | July 24, 2006 12:47 PM
Posted on July 24, 2006 12:47
Should have added: African crisis have been covered extensively by the BBC, PBS, and the print media (NY Times & Washington Post, in particular).
The French networks cover Africa extensively, especially news from their former colonies in the West.
If you were interested in news from Africa, you could find it and perhaps even blog about it.
Posted by cb | July 24, 2006 12:53 PM
Posted on July 24, 2006 12:53
No nukes - no worry.
That seems to be the consensus in various foreign affairs establishments round the world.
Posted by Mark Dowling | July 24, 2006 1:34 PM
Posted on July 24, 2006 13:34
“Fatigue: No matter how much you cover Africa, nothing ever seems to change.”
This is somehow different in the middle east?
Posted by Jeff | July 24, 2006 4:33 PM
Posted on July 24, 2006 16:33
“This is somehow different in the middle east?”
Touche.
Posted by cb | July 24, 2006 5:28 PM
Posted on July 24, 2006 17:28
Who is doing the killing, that makes all the difference.
Muslims killing Africans? - both groups have the sympathies of Western media, so who cares, the media can’t portray either as ‘the big, bad wolf’ because both groups are a bunch of losers - so they don’t even bother, it’s not like ambulance chasers in the media care about Africans.
The higher up the food chain of military might that you go however - the more the media will squeal with delight.
Posted by philanthropist | July 24, 2006 10:02 PM
Posted on July 24, 2006 22:02
I don’t think you can really rule out anti-semetism in the form of ‘anti-zionism’ as a factor effecting the coverage. There are still lots of people who get a hard on for that form of racism.
Posted by chris | July 25, 2006 6:18 PM
Posted on July 25, 2006 18:18
For me it was because:
a) there is always another crisis in Africa (crisis fatigue?)
and b) Syria had finally gotten out of Lebanon, and they had a chance to rebuild their country, despite their high unemployment and crippling debt. They had a good start: a democracy, women’s rights, Muslims and Christians living together and getting along…I had such hopes that it would turn into a ME good news story, maybe show what a real Arab democracy could be like - and now it’s getting bombed to shit.
Posted by Deanna | July 26, 2006 6:39 PM
Posted on July 26, 2006 18:39