Earthquake in China kills at least 207 people, thousands injured. Where is the news US?

So when I go to BBC and read about this devestating Earthquake BBC is reporting that there are at least 207 dead and 11,500 injured http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-22237162
and then I start looking on MSNBC, only to find nothing.. even an earthquake off the coast of Mexico with no injuuries or damages reported was there and there was nothing about this horrific tragedy in China. I am disturbed by the lack of media coverage in regards to world events in the US. Yes, I know American media is a joke and horribly biased, but from a compassion for humanity standpoint, you would think something this tragic on such a scale would be on the front page of news sites everywhere. An event of this scale is not just some small side story, and you would think they would consider it important enough to make sure people are aware of it.

(shrugs) its on CNN. Its in the *in case you missed it* section and in the world news section. Although CNN says 186

Also, it is on msnbc, and on Fox news

I think the big reason can be summed up as this. Not our problem. There were bigger stories like the Boston Bombing which killed Americans and thus was our problem. Is it a bad way of looking at things? Maybe. Besides the goal of the news is to make money and a bombing in America sells more newspapers and gets higher rating than something in another country.

Nobody really cares about China?

Alternatively, you could say that with a nation of a billion or so, 200 isn't a big deal.

But it's because the west, as a rule, doesn't care.

[mindless shilling]It was in our chat several hours ago...[/mindless shilling]

But yeah... the US has had one hell of a week. They didn't even cover the larger earthquake on the Iran-Pakistan border...

Not about Boston= we don't care.

That's how every news channel seems to be. I have nothing against Boston or its people, but I'd like to hear about what else is happening in my country and around the world.

The Gentleman:
[mindless shilling]It was in our chat several hours ago...[/mindless shilling]

But yeah... the US has had one hell of a week. They didn't even cover the larger earthquake on the Iran-Pakistan border...

What's sad is this would be a good week for some places in the world. >.<

It was mentioned on the local news over here... It's on the major news sites (yes, including MSNBC)... Not at all sure what you're talking about with it not being anywhere.

That said, with the news we've had this past week, anything outside the US will logically be pushed back a bit. Are you really surprised that news about Boston and Texas are in front of something from China?

hmm checked and al jazeera, bbc, cnn are covering it. fox news prefers just to repeat the same stuff about the boston bomber over and over. i mean that litterally too. its the same interviews, etc

This is an interesting and relevant article on the matter: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/owen-jones-our-shameful-hierarchy--some-deaths-matter-more-than-others-8581715.html

In the news media there is an implicit (or in some cases explicit) "hierarchy of death" where the deaths of Westeners are put first before anyone else- because Westerners are the main audience of such news. I found this paragraph quite interesting:

The former editor of the Mirror, Roy Greenslade, calls this the "hierarchy of death". Referring to Northern Ireland Troubles, he wrote of how "in the first rank - getting the most prominent coverage - are British people killed in Britain; in the second, the security forces, whether army or RUC; in the third, civilian victims of republicans; and, in the fourth, garnering very little coverage indeed, the victims of loyalists." In other words, newspaper editors made a judgement on the newsworthiness of blood being spilled based on the perceived value of the lives lost.

But, i don't expect US media to have reported about each British fatality during the troubles, and nor do i expect it to report each death of a British soldier in Afganistan today like the British media does. It feels selfish, but newsworthiness is selected based on how likely it's to interest the audience.

It comes down to human nature- sadly we're more interested in people like us than those who arn't. I don't think it's morally right that we should think like that, because all human lives have equal moral value, but i can sympathise with why we do that.

It is all about priorities. The News' priority is ratings, the audience's priority is things close to and/or affecting them and your priority is your feigned, almost dutiful outrage at them. I mean, when you first heard about this, was your first instinct to inform, or to scorn the ignorant. To put it another way, how can you not see the irony in complaining about people being overly provincial and shallow in their news consumption while using a tragedy to point out your own unrelated issue.

Where the fuck is your compassion that you spend more words condemning the media and demanding compassion from others,than helping, or encouraging others to help the actual victims of the tragedy.

Get off your high horse mate.

Well, Boston's still happening... only kind of not really. We haven't had any real news on it all day, so you'd think they'd at least have time to squeeze something else in for a bit.

Then again, AMERICA, so most people probably don't/wouldn't give a shit over here.

It's called News Value.

I suppose that, by their own standards, I must condemn every last person in the thread who've criticized local media for not reporting equally on all global disasters: On the basis of them not reacting with the exact same emotional response to each and every one of the millions of dead children every year, as they would were a local child they knew shot before their eyes. And not putting as much effort into alleviating as much of that suffering as they would with that local child. Such heartless hypocrites!

The only way to be objectively wrong, even if even the most basic framework of ethics is held to be subjective, is to maintain double standards. There simply is no wrong more indisputable than hypocrisy.

Your guide to the US News Spectrum:

1,000,000 murdered people in Zimbabwae < 10,000 killed in India < 1,000 killed in Spain < 100 killed in England < 10 killed in Detroit < 1 little girl killed in Denver

Multipliers:

10x if victim is child
4x if victim's family is photogenic
.5x if victim's family is not white
3x if method of crime was reasonably unheard of (chainsaw, bomb, acid)

If victim or victim's family is famous, prepare to live at the scene for the next month.

Thank you Jon Stewart for this info.

Because thats US news, if you want any world news that isn't some super disaster like the tsunami you'll have to to to the BBC.

Also we kinda have a big country so there is always something to report on and US news audiences are really self centered and only care about stuff happening in merica.

You know, there have been 2 earthquakes in Iran this month? One in the region of their nuclear plant, on the "National Nuclear Technology Day of Iran"?

I would have expected there to be some thread here about where Iran would place the fault (US? Cause, 'Mercia, Europe? With their rain stealing technology, Israel? And, their trained sharks), but it seems that people have more important shit to talk about.

@wombat_of_war

i mean that litterally too. its the same interviews, etc

Hm, I noticed that tendency, too, when I was in the USA last summer. Quite honestly, news in the USA are unbearable. And I don't just mean Fox News, I mean MSNBC, CBS and CNN, too. Constant commercial breaks, constantly repeated segments, constantly loud fanfares etc., come on... it's like they have ADD or something.

the clockmaker:
It is all about priorities. The News' priority is ratings, the audience's priority is things close to and/or affecting them and your priority is your feigned, almost dutiful outrage at them. I mean, when you first heard about this, was your first instinct to inform, or to scorn the ignorant. To put it another way, how can you not see the irony in complaining about people being overly provincial and shallow in their news consumption while using a tragedy to point out your own unrelated issue.

Where the fuck is your compassion that you spend more words condemning the media and demanding compassion from others,than helping, or encouraging others to help the actual victims of the tragedy.

Get off your high horse mate.

Actually my first reaction was " omg! Those people!" The numbers are staggering. This is far worse than even the plant explosion, and the boston bombings, and I was looking for more information on what was going on there. I did not become irritated with not being able to find the information until I could not find any information on it. I would have figured this to be all over the front page news everywhere with the amount of business the US conducts with China, the number of people living in the US with families and friends in China I would have figured this would have been considered important. I was a bit shocked that it was not, and that even the Mexcio earthquake they were reporting no injuries and damaged on was on the front page with pictures, and yet, I could find nothing about this. I was upset that something on this scale was not on the front page, allowing those who have friends and family in China to become aware of the situation quickly. Often people do not have time to look through all the news to find important information, they put the important stuff on the front. Somehow, whether or not some celebrity kissed another celebrity or diet tips of the week took priority over letting those with loved ones in the region know what is going on with their families.

Many often only look at how this affects people "non related". I view the news as much more than that, it is a tool that can help with communication when communication is difficult. If you have loved ones in the area, that you have not heard from, you are watching every second, scouring every image hoping to see a picture of those you care about being alive. I have done that myself on multiple occassions when friends and family have been in major disasters, and in that situation, the phones are down, the people there often cannot be reached to find out if they are okay or not, and the media coverage is all we really have until that is resolved. The families are in limbo waiting to hear what is happening to their loved ones. So yes, when realizing they didn't think those families affected were important enough to give them the same benefit they do when covering other events, I became a bit irritated at the blatant disrespect for those families affected.

This isn't some " unrelated issue" that I went on a rant about. My concern was directly related. If this had been just a " world event" and not a tragedy of this scale and importance, them not covering it would be acceptable, however, when something this bad happens, from a compassion for others and respect for life standpoint, I cannot understand how they would not think this takes priority over the stories they did choose for the front page.

Whether or not you realize it, The News DOES help those families affected who are waiting to hear if those they care about are okay. Not knowing is far more stressful than knowing either way. I do believe you misunderstood my intention.

madwarper:
You know, there have been 2 earthquakes in Iran this month? One in the region of their nuclear plant, on the "National Nuclear Technology Day of Iran"?

I would have expected there to be some thread here about where Iran would place the fault (US? Cause, 'Mercia, Europe? With their rain stealing technology, Israel? And, their trained sharks), but it seems that people have more important shit to talk about.

Actually I read about the Iran earthquakes, as they were put on the the front page where it should be. That was why I am confused this was not. There was coverage on that on MSN's homepage, I was shocked this was not, instead an earthquake in Mexico reporting no damages or injuries at the time was there.. with pictures of no damage. That didn't make any sense to me at all.

Lil devils x:

Actually my first reaction was " omg! Those people!" The numbers are staggering.

Maybe, maybe not, I can only work off of what you display where I can see it and what you have displayed to me is more condemnation than compassion. Read your OP again. Where is the compassion there?

This is far worse than even the plant explosion, and the boston bombings,

The point however, in the news is nothing so crass as a 'worse' event, it is change. News should be something that is going to change the daily life, or has the potential to change the daily life of the viewer. A natural disaster in Asia is not going to have that effect on 99% of the viewers and so is not a news priority. For the remaining 1%, there is the internet

and I was looking for more information on what was going on there. I did not become irritated with not being able to find the information until I could not find any information on it.

Then to be entirely honest, you are bad at looking. This is the internet and if you cannot find news here, you have no one to blame but yourself.

I would have figured this to be all over the front page news everywhere with the amount of business the US conducts with China, the number of people living in the US with families and friends in China I would have figured this would have been considered important. I was a bit shocked that it was not, and that even the Mexcio earthquake they were reporting no injuries and damaged on was on the front page with pictures, and yet, I could find nothing about this. I was upset that something on this scale was not on the front page, allowing those who have friends and family in China to become aware of the situation quickly.

Those with friends and family in the PRC will not be relying on US news for news in the PRC, and if they are, they should not be.

Often people do not have time to look through all the news to find important information, they put the important stuff on the front.

Nope, skimming the paper takes about 5 minutes at most and it takes less to search for a story. And again, if you have a special interest, there are special sources.

Somehow, whether or not some celebrity kissed another celebrity or diet tips of the week took priority over letting those with loved ones in the region know what is going on with their families.

Because that has more effect on the lives of viewers than the loss of life to someone who they don't know and never will. That is because, to you me and every other fucker out there who doesn't know them personally, that 207 is an abstraction and it is hard to empathise with an abstraction whereas people who know the stories of celebrities find it easier to follow them.

Many often only look at how this affects people "non related". I view the news as much more than that, it is a tool that can help with communication when communication is difficult. If you have loved ones in the area, that you have not heard from, you are watching every second, scouring every image hoping to see a picture of those you care about being alive.

That is wildly fucking impractical and if you are honest with yourself you know it. Think about it, for that to be effective, you need to dedicate you entire news service to constant displays of one event, repeating the names of the people in this one event that will have no bearing on the lives of 99% of your viewers.

I have done that myself on multiple occassions when friends and family have been in major disasters, and in that situation, the phones are down, the people there often cannot be reached to find out if they are okay or not, and the media coverage is all we really have until that is resolved.

1- Plenty of sources of news that aren't the main channels. Even on TV. 2-For actual concern, there are the disaster relief agencies, NGOs, embassies, foreign missions etc. One thing I learned on Black Saturday is that the news can't keep up with what is going on on the ground so when you actually need information.

The families are in limbo waiting to hear what is happening to their loved ones. So yes, when realizing they didn't think those families affected were important enough to give them the same benefit they do when covering other events, I became a bit irritated at the blatant disrespect for those families affected.

The whole thing becomes incongrous when you look at the many many other horrific events that you have not chosen as your source of dutiful outrage. You did not pick the Ahmadiyah, the Papuans, the Eritreans, the Zimbabweans. None of whom you have given the same benefit. Not just in this thread, but in any thread. People cannot keep up with all the bad shit in the world, and need to have some innoccous shit to relax with, otherwise how do they go on living?

And even if the event itself is being covered, waiting for your loved one to show up on the news is a shitty way of gaining information because, well, why would your loved one stand out?

This isn't some " unrelated issue" that I went on a rant about. My concern was directly related. If this had been just a " world event" and not a tragedy of this scale and importance, them not covering it would be acceptable, however, when something this bad happens, from a compassion for others and respect for life standpoint, I cannot understand how they would not think this takes priority over the stories they did choose for the front page.

It is unrelated. you have a platform here to give whatever information you could have chosen. The pertinent information, the relevant thread would have been 'holy shit you guys, this bad shit happened. Here is the story. Here is where you can go to look for loved ones. Here is where you can go to volunteer or donate.' Maybe with a postscript complaining about the media treatment. Your thread was not that thread, your thread was one using the victims of this disaster as a weapon to get at those less 'wise' or 'comassionate' than yourself. Using them as a tool to make yourself feel good by feeling angry.

Whether or not you realize it, The News DOES help those families affected who are waiting to hear if those they care about are okay. Not knowing is far more stressful than knowing either way.

And if you are relying on the mainstream news channels for personal information on an event I find it hard to have sympathy as you are passively waiting for the information to come to you as opposed to seeking it out.

In reality, the only reason that there is to complain about which event gets which coverage is crass point scoring.

I do believe you misunderstood my intention.

No, your intention, whether you are willing to admit it or not, was to show how good you are by using a horrific event to show how bad others are.

If your intent had been pure, the thread that you would have created would look nothing like this one.

Our country, like many, can be painfully self absorbed.

Notice how war works. Drone strikes abroad, accepted by most. Drone strikes domestically, terrifying. Olympic medalist from our country, grand hero. Olympical medalist from another country, they were doping.

It is a kind of sad, obnoxious limited empathy that shows racism in the world. Where people only share and show empathy to those they see an a "in-group". Countrymen, people of the nationality, people of the same ethnicity, religion, gender, sexuality.

I actually feel kind of lucky about how long they went on about the Japanese Tsunami disaster. Because despite being Japanese, it was a huge news story. I wish they did the same for Chinese disasters.

Which brings me to another point. I think that the United States cares less about events like these which happen to the poor. Poor countries China, get less empathy than rich countries like Japan or South Korea. Also, there are still people who are bitter in America about World War II, but America tends to more think about Japan today in Cold War terms. As allies against the Commies. And a safe, peaceful, properly Capitalistic nation with money.

the clockmaker:

Lil devils x:

Actually my first reaction was " omg! Those people!" The numbers are staggering.

Maybe, maybe not, I can only work off of what you display where I can see it and what you have displayed to me is more condemnation than compassion. Read your OP again. Where is the compassion there?

This is far worse than even the plant explosion, and the boston bombings,

The point however, in the news is nothing so crass as a 'worse' event, it is change. News should be something that is going to change the daily life, or has the potential to change the daily life of the viewer. A natural disaster in Asia is not going to have that effect on 99% of the viewers and so is not a news priority. For the remaining 1%, there is the internet

and I was looking for more information on what was going on there. I did not become irritated with not being able to find the information until I could not find any information on it.

Then to be entirely honest, you are bad at looking. This is the internet and if you cannot find news here, you have no one to blame but yourself.

I would have figured this to be all over the front page news everywhere with the amount of business the US conducts with China, the number of people living in the US with families and friends in China I would have figured this would have been considered important. I was a bit shocked that it was not, and that even the Mexcio earthquake they were reporting no injuries and damaged on was on the front page with pictures, and yet, I could find nothing about this. I was upset that something on this scale was not on the front page, allowing those who have friends and family in China to become aware of the situation quickly.

Those with friends and family in the PRC will not be relying on US news for news in the PRC, and if they are, they should not be.

Often people do not have time to look through all the news to find important information, they put the important stuff on the front.

Nope, skimming the paper takes about 5 minutes at most and it takes less to search for a story. And again, if you have a special interest, there are special sources.

Somehow, whether or not some celebrity kissed another celebrity or diet tips of the week took priority over letting those with loved ones in the region know what is going on with their families.

Because that has more effect on the lives of viewers than the loss of life to someone who they don't know and never will. That is because, to you me and every other fucker out there who doesn't know them personally, that 207 is an abstraction and it is hard to empathise with an abstraction whereas people who know the stories of celebrities find it easier to follow them.

Many often only look at how this affects people "non related". I view the news as much more than that, it is a tool that can help with communication when communication is difficult. If you have loved ones in the area, that you have not heard from, you are watching every second, scouring every image hoping to see a picture of those you care about being alive.

That is wildly fucking impractical and if you are honest with yourself you know it. Think about it, for that to be effective, you need to dedicate you entire news service to constant displays of one event, repeating the names of the people in this one event that will have no bearing on the lives of 99% of your viewers.

I have done that myself on multiple occassions when friends and family have been in major disasters, and in that situation, the phones are down, the people there often cannot be reached to find out if they are okay or not, and the media coverage is all we really have until that is resolved.

1- Plenty of sources of news that aren't the main channels. Even on TV. 2-For actual concern, there are the disaster relief agencies, NGOs, embassies, foreign missions etc. One thing I learned on Black Saturday is that the news can't keep up with what is going on on the ground so when you actually need information.

The families are in limbo waiting to hear what is happening to their loved ones. So yes, when realizing they didn't think those families affected were important enough to give them the same benefit they do when covering other events, I became a bit irritated at the blatant disrespect for those families affected.

The whole thing becomes incongrous when you look at the many many other horrific events that you have not chosen as your source of dutiful outrage. You did not pick the Ahmadiyah, the Papuans, the Eritreans, the Zimbabweans. None of whom you have given the same benefit. Not just in this thread, but in any thread. People cannot keep up with all the bad shit in the world, and need to have some innoccous shit to relax with, otherwise how do they go on living?

And even if the event itself is being covered, waiting for your loved one to show up on the news is a shitty way of gaining information because, well, why would your loved one stand out?

This isn't some " unrelated issue" that I went on a rant about. My concern was directly related. If this had been just a " world event" and not a tragedy of this scale and importance, them not covering it would be acceptable, however, when something this bad happens, from a compassion for others and respect for life standpoint, I cannot understand how they would not think this takes priority over the stories they did choose for the front page.

It is unrelated. you have a platform here to give whatever information you could have chosen. The pertinent information, the relevant thread would have been 'holy shit you guys, this bad shit happened. Here is the story. Here is where you can go to look for loved ones. Here is where you can go to volunteer or donate.' Maybe with a postscript complaining about the media treatment. Your thread was not that thread, your thread was one using the victims of this disaster as a weapon to get at those less 'wise' or 'comassionate' than yourself. Using them as a tool to make yourself feel good by feeling angry.

Whether or not you realize it, The News DOES help those families affected who are waiting to hear if those they care about are okay. Not knowing is far more stressful than knowing either way.

And if you are relying on the mainstream news channels for personal information on an event I find it hard to have sympathy as you are passively waiting for the information to come to you as opposed to seeking it out.

In reality, the only reason that there is to complain about which event gets which coverage is crass point scoring.

I do believe you misunderstood my intention.

No, your intention, whether you are willing to admit it or not, was to show how good you are by using a horrific event to show how bad others are.

If your intent had been pure, the thread that you would have created would look nothing like this one.

You are very mistaken, and I cannot even understand how you would think one would feel " good" in any way shape or form for feeling obligated to address this issue at all. I didn't feel " good' making this thread in any way. I do not even understand that line of thinking that it would make anyone feel good to speak of such things, but I do feel that this issue should be addressed directly. It is with great sorrow and remorse that these issues even have to be addressed.

You fail to understand what it is like when you actually have people you care about involved in such disasters and you frantically want to know what is happening to them, and are left feeling helpless because you cannot be there to save them yourself, that you cannot look with your own eyes, and speak to them due to the circumstances taking place. There are no " better sources" than the news to get you information, you are just as left out as everyone else. So you search everywhere for any tidbit you can get ONCE YOU FIND OUT something happend there. That is the issue here, there are many that would be unaware that an event even took place unless it is on the front page, unl;ess there is effort taken by the media itself to make sure people know this is happening. Why would someone go " searching for more information froma better source" if no one even bothered to tell them it had happened in the first place? Not everyone reads the newspapers, only the headlines. Not everyone even watches enough television to be notified of such things easily, that is why when something very serious happens resulting in such a tragic loss of human life they interrupt regular programming, they put it in bold on the front pages of home pages on the internet, they plaster it across the front pages of newspapers everywhere. It is so people will be aware that this is happening at all. They failed to do that, and of course gradually as people find out something has happened, they can go look through all sources available to find more information.

They did not do that however in this circumstance, and I feel they failed in their obligation of reporting by doing so. Yes, I do feel the media has an obligation to report major events, and to make people aware of what is happening when so many lives are lost. That is what they claim to do in the first place, and yes, it is now used as a tool, as an alert system that makes people aware of these things in this time. To claim the news " isn't a good source" to find out what is happening quickly is false. When the Tornados that passed by my house hit the neighboring town where my friend worked, I did not know she was alive or dead until I saw her there on the news footage. At first all I saw was the building she worked in completely gone, but due to the news coverage, I also saw her standing in the street. When I saw her there I called her mother, who had not watched the same channel I had and was still worried that her daughter had been killed and let her know her daughter was on the news in the street. Yes, that is the relief that is provided by the news to those friends and family that are watching this, that are paying attention. The pictures shown of the earthquake victims included pictures of people being rescued, their family members would recognize and see that their family member was safe. They showed pictures of people huddled in tents and sitting at a table, all of their family members and friends that saw that knew they were safe , even though it would probably be a very long time before they could actually speak to them themselves.

If it had not been for the news reporting the coverage of the California fires, my sister who lived there would not have known whether or not her own home was destroyed. I received a text from her that the fire was on her street, the house was filling with smoke, that they grabbed what they could and their cat and were evacuating, but the traffic was really bad. Later, after the fire had changed course and they had saved her neighborhood, she was still unaware of this because she was not near a TV, instead was still in her car and could not see what was and what was not destroyed. They showed images of her neighborhood that allowed me to see that the fire had stopped 2 houses before hers and that her home was saved. When watching the horror of 9/11 Yes, I had friends in that building that had attended a party at my home, and it was difficult not knowing whether they were alive or dead for so long. It is very hard waiting to find out, and that is extremely difficult for those involved. Regretfully, they perished that day, but I found that out earlier than later due to the news rather than be kept in the limbo state of extreme stress of frantically trying to find out if they were okay or not. Repeatedly, whether it was Ike or Katrina, or the Boston bombing, the News has been a tool that people have become to depend on for finding out when these things happen and should be considered a form of a " notification system" because it reaches the families and friends before anything else does.

As for how I " feel" when I read of such events, I think of how it would feel for it to be my family stuck in there, my family killed, me trapped in rubble and only view things from how I would feel if this was done to me. From my upbrining, all people of this world are " ONE" people, one family, so yes we should always view things from that point of view and treat all as family.

It was the main item on Dutch national news, as it should be.

While i dont know about the american news, here in the UK the BBC briefly mentioned it as more of a FYI sort of story.

not surprising because we are still getting coverage of the boston bombings and when the cover that they talk about the casaulties and they talk about the little white boy (giving his name and some details), the white woman (giving her names and details about her life and (and i quote) "A Chinese national"

seriously thats all they say about him, hes a chinese bloke. it really pisses me off

spartandude:
While i dont know about the american news, here in the UK the BBC briefly mentioned it as more of a FYI sort of story.

not surprising because we are still getting coverage of the boston bombings and when the cover that they talk about the casaulties and they talk about the little white boy (giving his name and some details), the white woman (giving her names and details about her life and (and i quote) "A Chinese national"

seriously thats all they say about him, hes a chinese bloke. it really pisses me off

It is something that really does needs to be changed, I also understand what it is like to be at the receiving end of this, as being Hopi, most of the time people here are just referred to as " Native Americans" rather than by their names. The news does not cover the tragedies of our people as well, and for the most part do not want to hear about what is happening to us, even when it is caused by their own government and people from their nation who are the ones responsible. I do have hope though that we will see these things change as more become aware that we are all one people, one family, and stop trying to make them feel as though they are not as important or less human because they come from a different culture. I do think this can be resolved with education and a change in priorities, and hope that as more become aware of these things we will see a change in society over time. Hopefully sooner rather than later, though I know these things take a long time to fully resolve.

I don't get to watch news that much because, well, I get whipped all day, but I did see it in the weekend on the TV news. It was in the "Around the world" segment, it got around twenty seconds. It got some more coverage on news websites though.

http://www.nbcnews.com/?id=11881780&q=china%20earthquake&p=1&st=2&sm=user

There where plenty of articles it just so happened that(as others stated) the boston bombing was the front page issue taking up what I believe was half of the article space on their front page if not more on the day it happened. If it had happened this week now that the bomber is out of the hospital and in jail it would be front page news.

dmase:
http://www.nbcnews.com/?id=11881780&q=china%20earthquake&p=1&st=2&sm=user

There where plenty of articles it just so happened that(as others stated) the boston bombing was the front page issue taking up what I believe was half of the article space on their front page if not more on the day it happened. If it had happened this week now that the bomber is out of the hospital and in jail it would be front page news.

At the time I looked for it on MSN, there was a story on the front page about the Mexico earthquake with a large photo of no damage, and stating " no injuries or damages reported". There were MANY stories on the front page besides the bombing. I went to CBS, ABC, FOX, and nothing on the front pages of any of them. The issue here is that unless someone was specifically looking for it, they wouldn't find it. You don't look for something until you know it happened. Most were not even aware it happened due to them not informing them in the first place.

Lil devils x:

dmase:
http://www.nbcnews.com/?id=11881780&q=china%20earthquake&p=1&st=2&sm=user

There where plenty of articles it just so happened that(as others stated) the boston bombing was the front page issue taking up what I believe was half of the article space on their front page if not more on the day it happened. If it had happened this week now that the bomber is out of the hospital and in jail it would be front page news.

At the time I looked for it on MSN, there was a story on the front page about the Mexico earthquake with a large photo of no damage, and stating " no injuries or damages reported". There were MANY stories on the front page besides the bombing. I went to CBS, ABC, FOX, and nothing on the front pages of any of them. The issue here is that unless someone was specifically looking for it, they wouldn't find it. You don't look for something until you know it happened. Most were not even aware it happened due to them not informing them in the first place.

I remember every day up till they caught the bomber and the day after all of the photo slots taken up on the front page of nbc.com was taken over by boston bombing information and a little bit of the immigration bill. I remember because I was pissed as fuck that it was the only thing anybody was talking about and I could find but a couple sparse article unrelated to the bombing.

dmase:

Lil devils x:

dmase:
http://www.nbcnews.com/?id=11881780&q=china%20earthquake&p=1&st=2&sm=user

There where plenty of articles it just so happened that(as others stated) the boston bombing was the front page issue taking up what I believe was half of the article space on their front page if not more on the day it happened. If it had happened this week now that the bomber is out of the hospital and in jail it would be front page news.

At the time I looked for it on MSN, there was a story on the front page about the Mexico earthquake with a large photo of no damage, and stating " no injuries or damages reported". There were MANY stories on the front page besides the bombing. I went to CBS, ABC, FOX, and nothing on the front pages of any of them. The issue here is that unless someone was specifically looking for it, they wouldn't find it. You don't look for something until you know it happened. Most were not even aware it happened due to them not informing them in the first place.

I remember every day up till they caught the bomber and the day after all of the photo slots taken up on the front page of nbc.com was taken over by boston bombing information and a little bit of the immigration bill. I remember because I was pissed as fuck that it was the only thing anybody was talking about and I could find but a couple sparse article unrelated to the bombing.

I think I was even more irritated when I saw the giant picture on MSN's homepage of an area where there were no injuries and no damages done and yet I couldn't find anything on this. I would like to think this an error in reporting, but it happens so frequently with world events it really isn't just that. I think this is a huge part of the problem as to why Americans are considered to ignorant of the world they live in. How could they not be when the media refuses to tell them anything? They don't know it's happening because no one is telling them it is!

It is frustrating to think that if any who had family there that would be returning to China to be with their families through this would not need the additional time to get a flight. This is why I feel it is so important for them to inform people of such events. It is hard enough to get a flight on standby in time, and when you have the possibility of many people needing to do so in such emergencies, it would make that even more difficult. They would need to be notified even sooner than most.

It has less to do with the nationality than it does the manner in which the people died. Dying in an earthquake is a tragedy, sure, but that's all. In Boston 2 men willfully killed and injured many many people. Look at our own news - more people died in the Texas fertilizer explosion than in Boston but it received almost no coverage. It was a completely preventable industrial accident, given the right amount of funding and regulation that were not in place, but nobody willed the fertilizer plant to explode. Even with the gross negligence, it still falls under the pretense of an accident.

Remus:
It has less to do with the nationality than it does the manner in which the people died. Dying in an earthquake is a tragedy, sure, but that's all. In Boston 2 men willfully killed and injured many many people. Look at our own news - more people died in the Texas fertilizer explosion than in Boston but it received almost no coverage. It was a completely preventable industrial accident, given the right amount of funding and regulation that were not in place, but nobody willed the fertilizer plant to explode. Even with the gross negligence, it still falls under the pretense of an accident.

If that were true, why did they have a big picture from Mexico showing no damages, and under it " no injuries or damages reported" notifying everyone that 1) it happened 2) no one was hurt? They very well could have put a line somewhere on that front page in bold "EARTHQUAKE IN CHINA HUNDREDS DEAD THOUSANDS INJURED" and those concerned could then at least know that something happend and then go look for more information. That really isn't too much to ask. I am not asking them to dedicate the amount of space or resources to such an event, just to let people know it happened at all, so that those families become aware and can start taking action if need be.

Privatized News Stations.

Doesn't pull in ratings.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked