2004 Tsunamis - The most popular catastrophe?

[ramapo]

I find it fascinating how the media (hence the public) has latched onto this catastrophe as compared to last year's earthquake in Iran which killed in the area of 40,000 human beings.

Iran was a leg in the "axis of evil" and not a popular tourist destination. Iran did not have any idyllic resorts full of Westerners on holiday. No celebrities, models, sport figures, or members of the royal family were killed. No movies of note have been filmed in Iran.
There wasn't much in the way of home video to show on TV over and over and over.

Is 40,000 dead any less a human catastrophe than 75,000 or 100,000 dead?

Two horrific disasters, both during the Christmas holiday a year apart.
One won the hearts and minds of America, the other passed with much less notice or concern.

[AllyCat]

1. Our beloved corporate media in action

Terrible tragedies but who'd know by watching the boob tube?

[slutticus]

2. It's all about the video footage.

People like to see that shit.

They're going to milk it for all they can. Hopefully, it will get more people to donate to the charities. That's the only good that can come from this.

[Phoebe_in_Sydney]

3. I understand your point but ...

40,000 dead is exactly 40,000 less of a catastrophe than 80,000 dead. Not being flippant, but that's the truth.

I think the extra coverage is more to do with the fact that it's affected 11 countries rather than just one. I don't the the number of wealthy tourists is really the difference.

11 countries makes the rescue and relief operations so much more complex.

Doesn't mean Bam wasn't a huge tragedy, but at least food, medical supplies other assistance could be delivered to the one place.

[Liberty Belle]

4. I saw quite a bit of coverage on the Iranian quake, actually.

While both disasters resulted in horrific death tolls, the tsunamis impacted a much broader area geographically--at least nine countries had severe damage. Also, the tsunamis affected people from around the world, since many were visiting Asia over the holidays. There is also arguably a greater need for relief efforts with the latter tragedy, since there are thousands upon thousands of survivors left homeless and a grave risk of disease over vast areas from floodwaters contaminated by dead bodies. So I think broader media coverage in this disaster is warranted.

[Indiana_Dem]

5. It is this to me:

Like another said above, this catastrophe affected several countries all at once. Also, a tsunami is not as common as an earthquake, whether it was caused by the earthquake or not. If you've watched any History Channel in the recent past, they did a piece on tsunamis and their history. The program painted tsunamis as horrifying, which is quite the truth from what we're seeing, and something that we might never see. Unfortunately, the program has become all too real. I'm sure many here in the states remember watching the program and how it popped into their heads immediately when this happened as it did for me.

Here is an interesting use of the word "tsunami" in one of the monthly emailings I get from postcarbon.org. This one is dated December 14th if you want to go and check it out. I couldn't send you a link from my email. But anyway, look at this use of the word whic is so ironic after what has happened (I don't see the word used mucha and i ran across this last night as i was going through some emails):

<snip>

'Storm clouds are rumbling. In the light of recent history, culminating in 2-11 (what we call the November 2nd US election), clearly citizens of Earth cannot look to the United States government to do much to prepare for or avert the "Perfect Storm" of oil peak, severely stressed ecosystems, exploding population, resource conflicts, and the gargantuan deficits of United States.

Recognizing that business-as-usual will hasten and exacerbate the pending crises (be they energy, fiscal, ecological, or some unpleasant combination), the ‘walking worried’ must begin preparing locally for the inevitable transition into the Post Carbon world. Until the tsunami hits the beach, preparations will appear ‘uneconomic’ and certainly premature to most people who don’t know about the deep implications of our energy and ecological problems. This relative calm, however, is the time to act; better to prepare now than under duress. Investments in time and money now will pay off handsomely in the inevitable energy constrained future. The programs, projects, and infrastructure that we are shaping together have the added benefit that they are designed to be helpful immediately - for our current already unfortunate situation, as well for whatever else happens, whenever it happens.

Through these dark days, into the growning storm and onto brighter days, Post Carbon Institute and Global Public Media aim to be right there with you, always a mouse click, a letter, or a phone call away. Your support has let us reach millions with our message (see 2004 accomplishments below). As we approach the end of 2004, we hope that we can count on you to help us start the New Year with a bang.'
<snip>

I just thought this was so eerie.

[mbp]

6. Further thought

Now, don't jump down my throat here. I simply want to offer a different form of thought, and maybe tone things down to a realistic level.

First, point taken. There should, perhaps, have been more coverage on the 40,000 dead. However, whether the tsunami hit or not, there was not as much coverage on it. Because the media failed to cover one tragedy, do they lose the right to cover another?

To answer your question, "Is 40,000 dead any less a human catastrophe than 75,000 or 100,000 dead?" - yes. About 35,000 to 60,000 lives difference. Both are horrid, but to different degrees.

Btw, which member of what royal family was killed in the tsunami?

[TNMOM]

7. it was the son of a Thai princess

... but I agree with the earlier poster's criticism. Fact is, the death toll is secondary to other considerations (like those listed in earlier posting) when it comes to what makes news in America. For example, the mudslide in California has killed just 10 people so far, but its images are on the front pages of every major newspaper and aired at the top of the hour of every news broadcast in America for two days running now.

The media has an undeniable bias towards sensational footage/images. That more than anything will dictate where a story is placed on the page and when it is aired during the newscast. If sex is involved, that will guarantee you another day or two of extensive follow-ups.

[tives12]

8. O'Reilly was "roped"

i decided to watch some of the o'reilly factor, and he was interviewing carrie fischer. he said in his interview, "i was somehow roped into doing a telethon to aid the tsunami victims".


wow.