Comments | darreneatworld: the edge of reason

darreneatworld

the edge of reason

Jan 13, 2005 17:06

i thought it was about time i took the ole' livejournal out for a spin. i have been suffering the most chaotic mood swings ever in the last week or so. it's like i'm a girl or something. basically i'm either really slow and moody or i'm painfully and offensively apathetic. this is bound to get me in trouble given the nature of my work. today is a ' ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

oncepure January 13 2005, 14:10:14 UTC

"as far as i'm concerned, the tsunami is more worthy of coverage than anything else in the world at the moment, and all other news is superfluous and self-indulgent."

I'll have to disagree with you there. I find our coverage of the tsunami "superfluous and self-indulgent". The obsession with a body count. The fixation on bragging about how good Australia is for giving more money than some other country, or per capita, etc. Its all posturing. And it just shows the contrary attitude of our media outlets and governments. Hundreds of thousands of citizens die in Iraq, barely a fucking mention, let alone fundraising schemes. Also, since the tsunami hit over twice the number of people who have died as a result of the tsunami have died elsewhere in the world from starvation. I don't see us giving a billion dollars to help combat that.

You can only laugh, or be enraged, when a large scale disaster is treated as nothing more than a political stunt and a chance to exert some influence on the governments in that area.

PS: What about this bullshit about Mark Latham not issuing a statement of condolence about the tsunami. Who fucking cares? A statement of condolence doesn't solve anyone's problems. Let us just presume he is feeling sorrow about the whole thing, I never really pictured him feeling joy over the deaths of thousands of people. At least he isn't using the whole thing to try to boost his approval rating. (If he has issued a statement and I just haven't heard about it, disregard the above. I haven't seen/read/heard the news in a few days because it sickens me).

darreneatworld January 14 2005, 08:06:27 UTC

yeah i know, that was kinda the point that i was trying to make: that everyone's feelings on this are sadly probably only skin (or pocket) deep.

Mel oncepure January 16 2005, 08:39:28 UTC

Like you're girl or something?? Heh. Nice.
How was that for steryotypical?

Hmmm... i don't know... i'm torn about the Tsunami thing. I do think that many of these tragedies are manipulated for political gain.
And with the SA thing... having been through a bushfire myself... it's not so insignificant.

Doesn't compare to the devestation caused by the tsunami at all, but it's not nothing.
The news always moves on. But it's not a reflection of the general feeling of the population. There are MANY people who will never move on from this.

Re: Mel darreneatworld January 21 2005, 05:48:45 UTC

i'm just saying that as soon as some other news item comes along, out attention is easily stolen away, and it just shows us up as being skin deep and short sighted.

Re: Mel oncepure January 21 2005, 19:04:19 UTC

The fact that you are not soley concentrated on one issue doean't make you shallow or short sighted.
There's new things in the world every day that demand attention... considering it all doesn't imply you value one particular thing any less.

Isn't it more short sighted to devote all energy to ONE thing at the expense of all else??

Re: Mel darreneatworld January 23 2005, 12:36:40 UTC

yeah, it probably is, but what would i know? maybe i'm just immune to empathy. commercial coverage of these kinds of events sucks.

dan's probably right; 200 thousand dead isn't any worse than 100 thousand or 10 thousand or one thousand or a hundred or ten.

Back to all threads