Numbing to Disasters

[ik911]

It seems that lately, every couple of months a new disaster requires our attention, support and funds.

However, it seems the animo to do so is decreasing.

When the Tsunami had happened with it's extreme deathtoll, every newschannel and newspaper had it covered extensively and massive amounts of money were gathered world-wide. The New-Orleans Hurricane also got wide attention, mainly because of the floods and governemental inefficiency (the latter also causing the former, but that's a different discussion alltogether.), but recieved no mentionable monetary support, which isn't a terrible issue in a rich country like the USA. The earthquake in Pakistan, however, receives neither loads of money, nor a lot of newscoverage, (the latter probably causing the former, again).

Is it because this disaster is not interesting enough with 'only' an estimated 19,000 deaths, which is just under 10% of the tsunami estimate, or because we've given all our money and attention away already? Or are we perhaps starting to get 'saturated' by disasters?

According to the dutch Unicef website, the reason behind the relatively disappointing/slow donations, is the fact that, compared to the tsunami, people feel less involved.

Reasons would be the fact that no Dutch people have been killed in the disaster, no amateur footage has been released to illustrate the impact and earthquakes happen more often, while the tsunami was a new occurence for many people.

According to the international Unicef site, everything is going just great.

My question to SYM: Do you think Pakistan recieves too little attention, and if so, do you think the decrease of public disaster-aid is a trend that sets on in the future?

Other comments are ofcourse more than welcome, as long as it's not spam.

[Phreddie]

I think that mother earth is pmsing (thats the best way i can describe it), all these hurricanes and earht quakes, this winter there will be crazy blizzards i bet, we are in the middle of a wamr cycle that partially contributes to global warming but thats another thread, we have had so man disasters people just dont care, if americans, dutch, canadians (where ever your from) die then wow give em a couple hundred bucks theg get on with your life, if there not ur ppl the show em the door, its been a lil to crazy disaster wise, but once these types of disasters become a lil more rare ppl will start to care a lot more. all we can do is watch and wait and help when asked, and ask when were not.

[Chimaera182]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ik911 The earthquake in Pakistan, however, receives neither loads of money, nor a lot of newscoverage, (the latter probably causing the former, again). Is it because this disaster is not interesting enough with 'only' an estimated 19,000 deaths, which is just under 10% of the tsunami estimate, or because we've given all our money and attention away already? Or are we perhaps starting to get 'saturated' by disasters?

I think the reasons may be two-fold. Part of it certainly is due to us being "bored" with all the disasters lately. Now that Hurricane Wilma is finally leaving Cancun after a much-needed vacation (before coming here to lovely Florida (oh joy), we can see how people will react to that disaster; after all, Wilma stayed over the Yucatan for days and a lot of the area has been very badly beaten (I heard earlier something like 1000 homes in Cancun were destroyed). We'll see just how much newscoverage Cancun will get and how much aid they will see. People didn't seem to care much for Pakistan and might not for Mexico because we're just tired of all the disasters.

The second reason is probably a little more sinister. The people here in the States probably don't care about the earthquake in Pakistan because it's a Muslim nation. It's sad but it's probably true that there will be people who will be glad that Muslims suffered an earthquake and feel they probably deserved it. After all, if Muslims attack the U.S., they deserve "God's retribution" and all Muslims deserve it. So that also may be why the media didn't cover the earthquake disaster as much, because they didn't think the people would care about Pakistanis

[Phreddie]

I dont think we dont care because they re muslim, most of us got over that stereotype long ago and only use it as an extreme insult to an arabic perosn. i ithnk were just sick and tired of people having the bucket kicked for them by the thousands. bacdk to the muslim stereotype: most of us are off of that it holds no meaning ne more the only reason it is still present is because many samll groups with loud vioces keep ti alive the majority are more hope they forigve and forget, thne lets nail some terrorists in a nonreligious and a more patriotic fashion.

[VoodooDali]

I blame the media.

Look at the Hurricane Wilma coverage. Every program just shows Floridians boarding up their houses and businesses, or surfers enjoying the larger waves in Naples, etc. Not one American news show has devoted much coverage to what Wilma is doing to the Yucatan. I had to hunt down footage and pictures on the web, and I found the best stuff on forums and not the news sites. The only time the American media shows disasters in other countries in depth is if we don't have one of our own going on. If the Tsunami had happened during Katrina, I don't think Americans or the media here would have paid that much attention.

This was really brought home to me by the coverage of Hurricane Stan. I cried when I saw what had happened to the villages around Lake Atitlan, since I lived there before. It was covered in our media for 1-2 days, and now it's been completely forgotten.

I suppose it's only natural that people are most interested in disasters in their own country, but the nearly complete absence of concern for what is happening in other countries is really appalling to me. It's a form of cultural narcissism.

For those SYMians in other countnes, does your media cover international disasters in more depth, or are the hurricanes, earthquakes etc. only blips on the radar screen as well? Are you aware of the lack of attention/concern over here in the USA?

Trivia tidbit: the word Hurricane is a Mayan word, from Hurrikan, which means the "Mind of Heaven."

[Phreddie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by VoodooDali I blame the media. <snip> The only time the American media shows disasters in other countries in depth is if we don't have one of our own going on. If the Tsunami had happened during Katrina, I don't think Americans or the media here would have paid that much attention. <snip>."

Its only natural, to give them credit they do give a small bit about international problems ie the bird flu, but the media is a bussiness, they are their to make a profit, to get good ratings, so they show what is important to the people so they will watch, and generally the closer soemthing is to home, the more important it is to avg. joe & jane.

[Dottie]

@VoodooDali&Chimaera182: This type of racist behaviour from the media and the population is older than 9/11 and not limited to USA. It's not limited to disasters either. All tragic news items gets more coverage if it originates from an area of interest.

This is not the same as being more interested in your home than anything distant. Obviously "home" is always an area of interest, but Japan and USA are both more distant from sweden than for example Morocco or Iran. Still tragic events there get more new coverage even in sweden.

[Phreddie]

That has too do with precent of pop. that are foriengers, if new see that half of all amreicans are chinese, they would do a report on asian happenings nightly, it also has to do with the international influence of each country. The Uk russia germany france US are huge countries, influence wise and economically, and china is rapidly growing as well. there are too amny variables to take into account when one is talking about what the media is covering and why.

[Hill-Shatar]

Not necessarily, Phreddie. Vancouver has a giant Asian community, yet the news there is not broadcasted accross the cities municipal news station whenever it is area specific.

It is hard for many Canadians to be knowledgabnle about naturl distaters striking our country... the only one we have really had to worry about lately is when the hurricane nailed the maritimes, and destroyed some of Canada's heritage in the process. Yet even then, the entire affair lasted two days, with only some minor stories about damage costs, ect, afterwards, and then again only for a week.

Our news stations seemed much more interested in the going ons in America. However, our media is also much more internationally based, since little news really goesd on in Canada, other then the odd item. We actually have many stories on China, believe it or not.

Heck, we even have spanish news channels in areas where there are no spanish speaking people.

However, Dottie is right. Although some areas do express racial profiling more broadly then other areas, racism is an international problem that we, as humans will never get over. The fact that it happened in Pakistan meant nothing up here. Only yesterday did they stop performing live media coverage on the event and what was going on, on some channels. For most of the week they have special reports on Pakistan interupting other events.

It spent less time on the air, but lets face it. If there was a giant explosion in Halifax again, would the populus want to hear about Pakistan, or the forty thousand sisters and brothers who were just blown to hell in Halifax? I would be more worried about the friends there, personally, and what it meant for people I was close to. I hate t say it, but sometimes lives of friends take priority over others from other mcountries, because I truly care. You do not go to the funerals of random people, you go to the funerals of friends, for a reason.

Of course, the Japanese will never send another Iwo Jima full of dangerously packed explosives to us again, but what if they did? That ship just wanted to make its schedule and leave for home, going all the way down to the Panama Canal. What happens if another freighter captain was reckless? Canada already holds the record of having the largest pre nuclear explosion in history... what would happen if we accidentally set of another which killed the millions in Halifax? Or even a small one that killed thousands? This is the country we live in, and no matter if the people their are tourists, it would take priority by our government, and therefore our media. CBC is Canadian owned, and would constantly have coverage on that, and on nothing else.

America gets tons of news coverage, but they are also the people who "protect" us from invasion, if they don't try and get us to join them on another escapade. Also, they are right next door. We do not get much coverage in Sweden, however, why would Canada run demographics on every election taking place around the world? We do not get much news on Germany either. We did, however, get news from Urkraine on the scandal. Somethings just bring our notuce more, I guess.

Shoddy government workings and natural disatsers, no matter where, take priority. Natural disater of political disater here? They take over their international brethern.

[Fiona]

I'm not so sure this is about racism or "compassion fatigue". The amount of media coverage is important, and that is to do with values, certainly. But accessibility is a factor,too. The news media cannot keep on producing information if they don't have any. It has been very hard to get to the areas in Pakistan which have been affected and that is a problem. It is also true that the Tsunami happened at Xmas, when people in the Western world are perhaps in a more "giving" frame of mind; and have already paid for an expensive consumerist Xmas. Right now a lot of people are worrying about how they will do that, as they do from about October to Xmas every year.

The fact that the Tsunami killed western people in places the wealthier had or could have been to was important as well. Not becaue of simplistic racism though, just because people have limited imagination and they can relate to things a bit better if they can see themselves in the situation. That might be reprehensible but I think it is understandable.

In this country giving to Pakistan has been less easy than the Tsunami was. I'm not sure why that is but here for the Tsunami all the shops had collection points. This is not true for the Pakistan disaster. You have to go and look for a way to give. That's not that hard, but people have busy lives and if it is in your face when you're doing ordinary things it's more likely that you will give, I think.

[dj_venom]

I think it also has to do with the countries affected. For instance, the tsunami hit Indonesia, a place where many people went for holidays and frequently visited. As such, we immediately had the thought "that could have been me" which was especially compounded by the horrific stories of people from the country being caught up... at least for Australia anyway.

Then New Orleans, well as Ik said, USA is a rich country, so they don't really need our help. Then, the main people hit were the US citizens, so no other countries were really affected, because they weren't there. Finally, we saw the government's apalling clean-up effort, and that people were refusing to leave even though certain death loomed. So we simply think "those stupid Yanks, they invade other countries but they can't even help themselves", so most don't donate.

Now, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and many other. These are the long-unspoken 'enemies' in a sort. Afghanistan harboured Osama among terrorists, and then Pakistan, well it went quite dismal in stopping them, though no fault of their own. As such, we are 'informed' (and I use that word when bombarded would fit better) with messages from the media about the evils of those places. So now that we get hit, what do people naturally think 'Serves the buggers right'. Though what most people always fail to realise is that the citizens take the brunt, even though they didn't do anything.

So all in all, if you are going to get hit by disaster, get hit in a popular and well liked country.

[Hill-Shatar]

A note that it jut isn't countries itself, but us as well. The thread about the Earthquake in Pakistan and India was off the first page before I knew it, and it had only had a few short replies from a handfull of people.

The last few years have been so racked with disasters that it is rare I do not go onto thecoputer and the top news for me is continuing the clean up of such and such disaster.

[Kipi]

DJV, I must disagree with you about the Katrina (sp?).
At least here in Finland it got very big attention, as well, as the disaster in Pakistan. Okay, the Pakistan didn't get that big attention, but at least it did get somewhat.

Ofcourse, Katrina affected even us, due the problem of getting oil (well, we are actually importing it from Russian mostly, but many oil-companies still raised prices... )

But I think it is true that the size of attention disaster gets in media is dependable of how much the country is affected. Therefore Tsunami got very big attention around the world, because it affected so many countries. Katrina got attention at least here, because it affected us with oil.

Also, about sending monetary help, well, it's very dependable of the media and how much the disaster is handled in media. Also again the affects to other countries determine how prepared people are sending help to country which is suffering. At least what I've heard of, USA did get monetary and material help from other countries. As did the countries affected by tsunami.

It's just pure fact that the media runs the world, and determines very much how people react, how well they know what is happening and so on...
As someone said, without media there is no world-wide catastrophes...

[dj_venom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipi DJV, I must disagree with you about the Katrina (sp?). At least here in Finland it got very big attention, as well, as the disaster in Pakistan. Okay, the Pakistan didn't get that big attention, but at least it did get somewhat.

Well that's the problem with me trying to talk in a global sense, being all the way down here in Australia, we have different media to you etc. so yeah, I couldn't hope to be accurate with that statement, but I meant it in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipi Ofcourse, Katrina affected even us, due the problem of getting oil (well, we are actually importing it from Russian mostly, but many oil-companies still raised prices... )

Well, just between you and me, I don't think it really made as much a difference as it is being blamed for. In fact, I think it was used as an excuse, but that's for another thread, mainly the one dedicated to it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipi But I think it is true that the size of attention disaster gets in media is dependable of how much the country is affected. Therefore Tsunami got very big attention around the world, because it affected so many countries. Katrina got attention at least here, because it affected us with oil.

Well that's exactly right. And because it was the first major disaster in awhile, all the special events were brought out to help it... events that only occur in rare circumstances, so having another so soon would be overkill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipi Also, about sending monetary help, well, it's very dependable of the media and how much the disaster is handled in media. Also again the affects to other countries determine how prepared people are sending help to country which is suffering. At least what I've heard of, USA did get monetary and material help from other countries. As did the countries affected by tsunami.

I know they did, but the man in the street is less likely to give money to someone he thinks is better off. And USA, well that's rated as the most powerful country, so they are really better off already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipi It's just pure fact that the media runs the world, and determines very much how people react, how well they know what is happening and so on... As someone said, without media there is no world-wide catastrophes...

Yep, a problem is only what you make it.

[CM]

Its odd...people do care but its not the people you would expect. Pakistan has gotten the majority of its aid not from the EU, the US or the World Bank or IMF. Its gotten it from Turkey, Indonesia and Kuwait. Heck the Indonesian mission wrote us a check of 3000 plus dollars in New York, money collected from within their mission. It was a very touching gesture.

In international relations terms its called donor fatigue. Basically they are tired of paying for all of the disasters and aid relief. On the scale of disasters this is pretty huge. It is worse than the Tsunami. It affects nearly 3 million people, with nearly 1 million without basic necessities. The response has been very slow from entities not just countries but international financial institutions as well as they are using it for political leverage, specifically the EU.

The US oddly enough has been extremely responsive in helping with phyiscal support. If it wasn't for the US military chopper teams the situation on the ground would be much much worse. To put it bluntly its becuase it doesn't affect them. If something affects you, you want to know about it. If it affects your national citizens you want to know about it. The Indo Pak region that got hit did not hold alot of foriegners and/or was not a hot desitination spot for many. So it doesn't matter. It happened in a third world country. Bam was just as bad on the media. It was in the news for only 5 days. I can bet people already have forgotten what happened in Bam