Are civilian deaths MORE valued when they are white western citizens than opposite??
In recent news we have seen many tragedies of deaths circulated around the world. What I have never understood is that when western citizens (mostly white) are found dead in that tragedy, the western media quickly circulates the news about those specific deaths only, as if their deaths are more superior than others.
If 100 people died in a plane crash, bombings or have been given capital punishments in foreign countries or whatsoever, the western media is quick to find that one American, British, Australian, German etc. that has died and make it known to the world rather than equating all the victims when reporting.
Surely we are all humans who deserve to all be acknowledge if innocently killed so why does the media single out western citizen deaths as the most important??
ANY THOUGHTS???
If 100 people died in a plane crash, bombings or have been given capital punishments in foreign countries or whatsoever, the western media is quick to find that one American, British, Australian, German etc. that has died and make it known to the world rather than equating all the victims when reporting.
Surely we are all humans who deserve to all be acknowledge if innocently killed so why does the media single out western citizen deaths as the most important??
ANY THOUGHTS???
If a South African is killed in a terrorist attack obviously South African media will highlight that fact. Likewise if 10 British people die in an attack the British media will highlight it. And if Iranians die in a terrorist attack their media will highlight it.
Nothing to do with racism exactly. It is just countries care more about the deaths of their own citizens than others. If the media was to treat the deaths of innocent people of all nationalities the same as their own they wouldn't have enough time to broadcast anything else.
Nothing to do with racism exactly. It is just countries care more about the deaths of their own citizens than others. If the media was to treat the deaths of innocent people of all nationalities the same as their own they wouldn't have enough time to broadcast anything else.
This is sort of reporting is fairly logical and understandable tbh
US, UK, Denmark, Swiss are perceived as first world nation where "peace" and "Justice" is an everyday phenomena. If some goon were to go on a shooting spree then this would grab headlines since such a country is hardly associated with violence in it's recent history.
Syria on the other hand as been a hell hole ever since 2011 or something. Unfortunately people dying over there is seen as something "expected".
It is sad but this is how journalism works
US, UK, Denmark, Swiss are perceived as first world nation where "peace" and "Justice" is an everyday phenomena. If some goon were to go on a shooting spree then this would grab headlines since such a country is hardly associated with violence in it's recent history.
Syria on the other hand as been a hell hole ever since 2011 or something. Unfortunately people dying over there is seen as something "expected".
It is sad but this is how journalism works
They are more valued in the white, western world. Obviously.
Original post by Peju
In recent news we have seen many tragedies of deaths circulated around the world. What I have never understood is that when western citizens (mostly white) are found dead in that tragedy, the western media quickly circulates the news about those specific deaths only, as if their deaths are more superior than others.
If 100 people died in a plane crash, bombings or have been given capital punishments in foreign countries or whatsoever, the western media is quick to find that one American, British, Australian, German etc. that has died and make it known to the world rather than equating all the victims when reporting.
Surely we are all humans who deserve to all be acknowledge if innocently killed so why does the media single out western citizen deaths as the most important??
ANY THOUGHTS???
If 100 people died in a plane crash, bombings or have been given capital punishments in foreign countries or whatsoever, the western media is quick to find that one American, British, Australian, German etc. that has died and make it known to the world rather than equating all the victims when reporting.
Surely we are all humans who deserve to all be acknowledge if innocently killed so why does the media single out western citizen deaths as the most important??
ANY THOUGHTS???
Western media will mention those people specifically as they are western people. If china has a bunch of people killed its media does exactly the same and so does everyone elsewhere around the world. Plus sorry but I'm more concerned and interested about my fellow countrymen being killed than people from anywhere else. My fellow country people are more important to me yes
Original post by Peju
What I have never understood is that when western citizens (mostly white) are found dead in that tragedy, the western media quickly circulates the news about those specific deaths only, as if their deaths are more superior than others.
The points you have made:
1) Western media focuses on western issues.
2) Western people are usually Caucasian.
Your conclusion: The west is racist for focusing on Caucasians.
Do the points you have made support the conclusion?
The issue is you suffer from confirmation bias. Oddly enough, if you read Japanese media, they mainly focus on Japanese issues. Does that make them racist? The media of every country mostly focuses on the issues of the region then are in.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Swanbow
If a South African is killed in a terrorist attack obviously South African media will highlight that fact. Likewise if 10 British people die in an attack the British media will highlight it. And if Iranians die in a terrorist attack their media will highlight it.
Nothing to do with racism exactly. It is just countries care more about the deaths of their own citizens than others. If the media was to treat the deaths of innocent people of all nationalities the same as their own they wouldn't have enough time to broadcast anything else.
Nothing to do with racism exactly. It is just countries care more about the deaths of their own citizens than others. If the media was to treat the deaths of innocent people of all nationalities the same as their own they wouldn't have enough time to broadcast anything else.
I understand your point but does the whole media need to focus solely on them?? It doesn't take that much time to focus on other nationalities, In fact why do we EVEN need to recognise Nationality on tragedies??
In addition, I don't think its just merely British people by British media (as you pointed out). The focus is on western people. Even if the individual is not from Britain BUT still happens to be western, He/She is still very much acknowledged than other non-westerners. For example, during the Indonesian execution, the western media (NOT just the Australian) made it very known to us that two Australians were also facing death. I highly doubt that if those western citizens weren't there, there would have been a publicised campaign on Indonesia's capital punishment on drug trafficking.
Of course they are, people identify with their own brethren and ethnic group than people from alien cultures and societies 3000 miles away.
Do you expect muslims in Pakistan to value their own people lives more than westerners, of course you do. This is basic human nature and psychology.
Westerners identify with other westerners more than people from other cultures so obviously they are going to value these lives more
And please drop the patronising 'were all humans' fluffy, waffling nonsense please
Do you expect muslims in Pakistan to value their own people lives more than westerners, of course you do. This is basic human nature and psychology.
Westerners identify with other westerners more than people from other cultures so obviously they are going to value these lives more
And please drop the patronising 'were all humans' fluffy, waffling nonsense please
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Peju
In recent news we have seen many tragedies of deaths circulated around the world. What I have never understood is that when western citizens (mostly white) are found dead in that tragedy, the western media quickly circulates the news about those specific deaths only, as if their deaths are more superior than others.
If 100 people died in a plane crash, bombings or have been given capital punishments in foreign countries or whatsoever, the western media is quick to find that one American, British, Australian, German etc. that has died and make it known to the world rather than equating all the victims when reporting.
Surely we are all humans who deserve to all be acknowledge if innocently killed so why does the media single out western citizen deaths as the most important??
ANY THOUGHTS???
If 100 people died in a plane crash, bombings or have been given capital punishments in foreign countries or whatsoever, the western media is quick to find that one American, British, Australian, German etc. that has died and make it known to the world rather than equating all the victims when reporting.
Surely we are all humans who deserve to all be acknowledge if innocently killed so why does the media single out western citizen deaths as the most important??
ANY THOUGHTS???
The sad thing is these people had died in individual accidents in the UK nobody would bat an eyelid.
I hate top say it but when it comes to foreign tragedies, it's the white victims that seem to carry more cachet then the brown/foreign ones.
It's why the shootings in Tunisia are being treated a big deal while the media ignores that Arabs are dying daily in the continuing unrest in the middle-east.
Just the way it is I suppose. The media must think I relate more to some fat pasty Brits, even though the region is chock full of people being shot dead.
Original post by Studentus-anonymous
.
I already covered this. Care to attempt to form a counter argument? Or is it just easier to ignore the arguments which make what you say seem less credible?
What you fail to consider is that "the media" is not one giant company that distributes the same news story to every country in the world. Is it so hard to understand why a country's media mostly focuses on their region? Or is it easier to automatically assume racism?
You are upset that western media mostly covers western issues, instead of middle eastern issues. Ok. Then why not pick up a middle eastern newspaper which does exactly that, instead of expecting western media to focus on middle eastern issues?
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Studentus-anonymous
The sad thing is these people had died in individual accidents in the UK nobody would bat an eyelid.
I hate top say it but when it comes to foreign tragedies, it's the white victims that seem to carry more cachet then the brown/foreign ones.
It's why the shootings in Tunisia are being treated a big deal while the media ignores that Arabs are dying daily in the continuing unrest in the middle-east.
Just the way it is I suppose. The media must think I relate more to some fat pasty Brits, even though the region is chock full of people being shot dead.
I hate top say it but when it comes to foreign tragedies, it's the white victims that seem to carry more cachet then the brown/foreign ones.
It's why the shootings in Tunisia are being treated a big deal while the media ignores that Arabs are dying daily in the continuing unrest in the middle-east.
Just the way it is I suppose. The media must think I relate more to some fat pasty Brits, even though the region is chock full of people being shot dead.
The Media does not ignore arabs dying, I see it on the news all the time. Have you tried reading a newspaper or watching the news on TV?
Original post by Mark8346
The points you have made:
1) Western media focuses on western issues.
2) Western people are usually Caucasian.
Your conclusion: The west is racist for focusing on Caucasians.
Do the points you have made support the conclusion?
The issue is you suffer from confirmation bias. Oddly enough, if you read Japanese media, they mainly focus on Japanese issues. Does that make them racist? The media of every country mostly focuses on the issues of the region then are in.
1) Western media focuses on western issues.
2) Western people are usually Caucasian.
Your conclusion: The west is racist for focusing on Caucasians.
Do the points you have made support the conclusion?
The issue is you suffer from confirmation bias. Oddly enough, if you read Japanese media, they mainly focus on Japanese issues. Does that make them racist? The media of every country mostly focuses on the issues of the region then are in.
Definition of Journalism: "Journalism is the activity of gathering, assessing, creating, and presenting news and information. It is also the product of these activities."
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/
When does it say to report news focusing only on western citizens???
The point of journalism/news is to be unbiased.
Of course you can highlight that a specific nationality died that belongs to your nationality of your news channel or whatever (even though I disagree that nationality is important in tragedies) but at the same time, that does not make way to only focus on that specific nationality and disregard others as if they are worthless.
And to your excuse that because most western countries are white then white people of course need to be focused more than non-whites?? Amusing.
Original post by Peju
I understand your point but does the whole media need to focus solely on them?? It doesn't take that much time to focus on other nationalities, In fact why do we EVEN need to recognise Nationality on tragedies??
In addition, I don't think its just merely British people by British media (as you pointed out). The focus is on western people. Even if the individual is not from Britain BUT still happens to be western, He/She is still very much acknowledged than other non-westerners. For example, during the Indonesian execution, the western media (NOT just the Australian) made it very known to us that two Australians were also facing death. I highly doubt that if those western citizens weren't there, there would have been a publicised campaign on Indonesia's capital punishment on drug trafficking.
In addition, I don't think its just merely British people by British media (as you pointed out). The focus is on western people. Even if the individual is not from Britain BUT still happens to be western, He/She is still very much acknowledged than other non-westerners. For example, during the Indonesian execution, the western media (NOT just the Australian) made it very known to us that two Australians were also facing death. I highly doubt that if those western citizens weren't there, there would have been a publicised campaign on Indonesia's capital punishment on drug trafficking.
You have been given to very good answers to this which together combine to answer this question pretty fully. The first is that people are more interested in those they perceive to be their own people. Thus the British media, which caters to British people, is (generally speaking) interested first in the fate of British people, then the fate of the most similar and related people such as Australians, then other Europeans, and so on. This is the media catering to what people are interested in and care about. It is not a conspiracy.
The second aspect of this is that, as mentioned, the violent deaths of people from stable, peaceful countries are seen as more notable because they are unusual. An Iraqi being killed by a suicide bomb is an everyday occurrence--a Briton being killed by one is unusual and thus considered newsworthy. Again, no conspiracy.
Original post by Peju
Definition of Journalism: "Journalism is the activity of gathering, assessing, creating, and presenting news and information. It is also the product of these activities."
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/
When does it say to report news focusing only on western citizens???
The point of journalism/news is to be unbiased.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/
When does it say to report news focusing only on western citizens???
The point of journalism/news is to be unbiased.
Spamming the definition of journalism at me isn't providing an argument for why a country's media shouldn't focus on the issues in the region it is located in. A country's media focusing on the region does not make it biased.
Bias would be taking a particular side, and has nothing to do with focusing on the region where the country is located..
Original post by Peju
Of course you can highlight that a specific nationality died that belongs to your nationality of your news channel or whatever (even though I disagree that nationality is important in tragedies) but at the same time, that does not make way to only focus on that specific nationality and disregard others as if they are worthless.
What you consistently fail to understand is that the media in all countries mostly focus on the region that they are in. It has nothing to do with people outside of the region being worthless. If you want to know more about the middle east, why would you pick up say for example a spanish newspaper instead of a middle eastern one?
I would expect an Iraqi newspaper to mostly focus on Iraqi issues. So I wouldn't pickup an Iraqi newspaper and cry that it isn't mentioning Spanish Issues. I would expect a Spanish newspaper to mostly focus on Spanish issues, so I wouldn't pickup a Spanish newspaper and cry that it doesn't talk enough about Iraqi issues. This has nothing to do with racism. You are simply lacking in common sense if you can't understand why a newspaper mostly focuses on the region in which it is located.
Original post by Peju
And to your excuse that because most western countries are white then white people of course need to be focused more than non-whites?? Amusing.
What is wrong with your comprehension? I said a country's media mostly focuses on the issues in the region. This happens in every country in the world. I can't understand why you are trying to make this into a racist conspiracy.
(edited 8 years ago)
This topic is going around and around in circles, the OP does not understand and i would advise not to waste anymore time trying to explain to the OP
Think the fact Jews are white has a role to play.
Original post by Mark8346
Spamming the definition of journalism at me isn't providing an argument for why a country's media shouldn't focus on the issues in the region it is located in. A country's media focusing on the region does not make it biased.
Bias would be taking a particular side, and has nothing to do with focusing on the region where the country is located..
What you consistently fail to understand is that the media in all countries mostly focus on the region that they are in. It has nothing to do with people outside of the region being worthless. If you want to know more about the middle east, why would you pick up say for example a spanish newspaper instead of a middle eastern one?
I would expect an Iraqi newspaper to mostly focus on Iraqi issues. So I wouldn't pickup an Iraqi newspaper and cry that it isn't mentioning Spanish Issues. I would expect a Spanish newspaper to mostly focus on Spanish issues, so I wouldn't pickup a Spanish newspaper and cry that it doesn't talk enough about Iraqi issues. This has nothing to do with racism. You are simply lacking in common sense if you can't understand why a newspaper mostly focuses on the region in which it is located.
What is wrong with your comprehension? I said a country's media mostly focuses on the issues in the region. This happens in every country in the world. I can't understand why you are trying to make this into a racist conspiracy.
Bias would be taking a particular side, and has nothing to do with focusing on the region where the country is located..
What you consistently fail to understand is that the media in all countries mostly focus on the region that they are in. It has nothing to do with people outside of the region being worthless. If you want to know more about the middle east, why would you pick up say for example a spanish newspaper instead of a middle eastern one?
I would expect an Iraqi newspaper to mostly focus on Iraqi issues. So I wouldn't pickup an Iraqi newspaper and cry that it isn't mentioning Spanish Issues. I would expect a Spanish newspaper to mostly focus on Spanish issues, so I wouldn't pickup a Spanish newspaper and cry that it doesn't talk enough about Iraqi issues. This has nothing to do with racism. You are simply lacking in common sense if you can't understand why a newspaper mostly focuses on the region in which it is located.
What is wrong with your comprehension? I said a country's media mostly focuses on the issues in the region. This happens in every country in the world. I can't understand why you are trying to make this into a racist conspiracy.
Its very obvious that you didn't read my posts properly and only decided to attack when you saw 'white' westerners. LOOL. Did I offend you??
You can address issues about your country without CONSISTENTLY pointing it out as if they were the only people that died. AND Journalism is not only about focusing on news in your country if you don't know. You also report around the world news.
The ignorance is beginning to show mate.
Making it into a Racist conspiracy??? You're very funny. Please go to bed.
Original post by Peju
Its very obvious that you didn't read my posts properly and only decided to attack when you saw 'white' westerners. LOOL. Did I offend you??
You can address issues about your country without CONSISTENTLY pointing it out as if they were the only people that died. AND Journalism is not only about focusing on news in your country if you don't know. You also report around the world news.
The ignorance is beginning to show mate.
Making it into a Racist conspiracy??? You're very funny. Please go to bed.
You can address issues about your country without CONSISTENTLY pointing it out as if they were the only people that died. AND Journalism is not only about focusing on news in your country if you don't know. You also report around the world news.
The ignorance is beginning to show mate.
Making it into a Racist conspiracy??? You're very funny. Please go to bed.
Let me ask you something.
In your initial post you claimed that you did not understand why the media is like this.
Is it safe to say that you now understand why this is the case, you just believe that major media sources should make different editorial decisions based upon different values?
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
