Heartland

lucretia wrote:And whilst YOU might not know anything at all about Indonesia, Thailand, Sumatra or other places in that area, there are many people worldwide who do and have families, friends and work colleagues in those regions who were there at the time of this natural catastrophe. I am speaking from personal experience here and I still don't know if that particular person is safe or not.

Being a celebrity does not mean your life is more worthwhile or worthless than the life of a homeless person on the side of the road and while it might seem inconceivable and "hideously impractical" to you, it is purportedly that precise mechanism in the human brain called "humanity" that allows us to tune into the global psyche at times like these and set us apart from insects.

I agree on the "manufactured grief" point above, especially with regards to the One minute silence and flags at half mast thing but unfortunately in the "civilised" world, our rituals kinda come with all that.

But the point is the majority of people in Europe (from where I am writing) don't have any particular personal connection with SE Asia. Of course there are individuals who are caught up on a personal level, but the numbers of Westerners affected are proportionally low because it's on the opposite side of the planet. Don't assume that diminishes my sympathy, but also don't assume that I'm going to care more because someone working in the affected area knows someone whose brother lives in the same town as me.

Therefore the public impact is less than in the case of the death of Diana (or David Beckham having an affair) simply because the people and places affected are not routinely pushed in our faces day after day.

I didn't say being a celeb made you more important or valuable. It just means you are recognisable to a greater number of people. How many people on here will confess to dubious fantasies about Mr Eldritch? How many of them would feel the same way if he was just another bloke in a leather jacket drinking in Leeds? One Andrew Eldritch should logically equal one Princess Diana or one Indonesian fisherman ... but we both know that when his time comes there will be far more discussion of that on here than there has been of anything else recently.

Hideously impractical relates directly to the idea that we should be 150,000 times more upset than this than we were by Diana's death. Of course, even that equation means we should only be 75,000 times more upset since Dodi was killed in the same crash (50,000 if the driver was killed too, I can't remember which rather proves my point about celebs). I don't know how many people die every day, but I'd guess it's a huge number. Do we mourn ever single one equally, irrespective of what difference they make to us personally? Will you have a minute's silence for each, or go to every funeral? Alternatively, will you be content with gawping at the TV before shrugging and getting on with your life when you lose someone close to you? Maybe we should value everyone equally, but with 6 billion people out there it's not realistic, is it?

I think we are getting our wires crossed a bit here - it would appear that you are making more of a point concerning the media shark feeding frenzy and who or what gets more coverage and is more deserving of such public attention ...
And if we are talking about that subject, then I'm sure your points are without doubt correct - I work in the media monitoring business and we do get to notice the trends, especially when something as massive as this happens - it is, at the moment, complete lock down season on any other news, like it was with 911 and other large scale events that have global impact. The media have tunnel vision and can only ever handle one big story at a time.

Yes, I think we were probably heading down the path of "arguing about the God we don't believe in", to quote Markfiend when I was having another unstructured rant a couple of months ago!

Speaking of media trends, it did strike me that one reason for the attention paid to the Tsunami (as opposed to, say, floods in Bangladesh) was that it happened during a very quiet news week. No politics, not much in the courts ... this time of year is all review of the year, top tips for 2005 and dull columnists discussing hangovers. I seem to recall an earthquake in Armenia in about 1988 getting a similarly high profile around Christmas, whereas the war over Nagarno Karabakh has had next to no media interest.

Journalists, eh? Pah!

andymackem wrote:Speaking of media trends, it did strike me that one reason for the attention paid to the Tsunami (as opposed to, say, floods in Bangladesh) was that it happened during a very quiet news week.

probably helped that some of the western middle class' favourtie holiday destinations were right in the firing line as well. makes it so much more real than most tragedies which only kill those funny little brown people.

and when did we start capitalising tsunami?

andymackem wrote:Yes, I think we were probably heading down the path of "arguing about the God we don't believe in", to quote Markfiend when I was having another unstructured rant a couple of months ago!

Speaking of media trends, it did strike me that one reason for the attention paid to the Tsunami (as opposed to, say, floods in Bangladesh) was that it happened during a very quiet news week. No politics, not much in the courts ... this time of year is all review of the year, top tips for 2005 and dull columnists discussing hangovers. I seem to recall an earthquake in Armenia in about 1988 getting a similarly high profile around Christmas, whereas the war over Nagarno Karabakh has had next to no media interest.

Journalists, eh? Pah!

I think this event would have gotten a media frenzy whenever it happened but the fact that it happened on our Holy Holidays gave it maximum tissue-box pulling appeal ... not that it ISN'T a highly emotional issue and I am not being flippant here, in case anyone thinks I am.
Good points raised all round here and interesting discussion but at the end of the day, all those people and children have to be sorted out and pronto.

I'm starting to get photos sent to me from over there today and all I can say is I am feeling completely sick and stunned stupid ... I've never seen anything like this before and I consider I have a fairly high level of tolerance towards graphic imagery and no, I definitely won't be posting any of them here, they will probably end up on the wires soon anyway.

RicheyJames wrote:

andymackem wrote:Speaking of media trends, it did strike me that one reason for the attention paid to the Tsunami (as opposed to, say, floods in Bangladesh) was that it happened during a very quiet news week.

probably helped that some of the western middle class' favourtie holiday destinations were right in the firing line as well. makes it so much more real than most tragedies which only kill those funny little brown people.

and when did we start capitalising tsunami?

i did wonder almost immediately and very cynically when the list of celebs would be out. sorry. i was crying at the same time, for the right reasons.

Apparently Charlie Dimmock's mother is either missing or dead. Is that celeb enough?

i'll see your charlie dimmock and raise you a dickie attenborough

Pah. This game's too rich for me. I fold.

Well, my form teacher mentioned before the Xmas hols he'd be going to India for the holidays.

He's not back yet.

Did you see that footage of the tidal wave coming down the road in Banda Aceh????
5 km from the sea?
That brought the scale of things right home.

emilystrange wrote:Did you see that footage of the tidal wave coming down the road in Banda Aceh????
5 km from the sea?
That brought the scale of things right home.

in a way that over 150,000 deaths never could...

The amount of money raised is even more overwhelming.

I'll be doing my part. The locals have been gathering round to donate to a hospice shop doing a Tsunami appeal. Apparently they get a lot of record players, and if I can find one, I'll be even closer to hearing the sweet sounds of The Reptile House. I've already heard it on SGWBM though, so it'll have to be Train and Afterhours, neither of which I've heard, but I have on EP.

RicheyJames wrote:

emilystrange wrote:Did you see that footage of the tidal wave coming down the road in Banda Aceh????
5 km from the sea?
That brought the scale of things right home.

in a way that over 150,000 deaths never could...

no you twit, the physical scale of it coming straight at you. i found it difficult from most of the videos, cos they were quite far away from the wave, and there wasn't a great deal of stuff to guage the size of it against. It was seeing that from a few feet away, from the second floor, with teh force it had so far from the sea.

now there's no need to stoop to the level of second-rate playground insults. your intial statement was utterly fatuous. and surely it's not all that difficult to comprehend the nature of a force capable of such obvious destruction without the aid of moving pictures?

Pick on someone your own size big nose.

obviously i am more of a visual learner than you.
i'm sure quiffy would rather i used playground insults.
and if those moving pictures gave me a far greater insight into the physical scale of destruction, then how can it be a fatuous comment?
there are two issues here, for me, the human cost in death and disease which affected me greatly, thank you, and the destruction of livelihoods/environments/societies/infrastructure etc which will affect more people than 150,000. indeed will add to that total.

come now ladies and gents, stop your bickering.

i take ms strange's point, even if richey misses it. the scale of the tsunami itself, not the scale of the disaster...

emilystrange wrote:obviously i am more of a visual learner than you.

for the teacher-jargon.

But yes, actually seeing footage like that gives far more impact in terms of understanding the sheer scale of the forces involved than a dry list of facts and figures.

Francis wrote:Pick on someone your own size big nose.

again the tiresome reliance on personal insults. such a pity that so many are unable to make their point in any other way...

emilystrange wrote:if those moving pictures gave me a far greater insight into the physical scale of destruction, then how can it be a fatuous comment?

last time i checked the dictionary was still defining fatuous as "not carefully thought about" which is exactly how your initial comment came across. it still does.

Quiff Boy wrote:come now ladies and gents, stop your bickering.

you're just no fun anymore.

RicheyJames wrote:

Quiff Boy wrote:come now ladies and gents, stop your bickering.

you're just no fun anymore.

unlike your good self who is a barrel of laughs, i suppose?

i would appear not to have the chairman to kick your arses anymore so i've got to start doing it myself aint i?

Quiff Boy wrote:

RicheyJames wrote:

Quiff Boy wrote:come now ladies and gents, stop your bickering.

you're just no fun anymore.

unlike your good self who is a barrel of laughs, i suppose?

you know you love me really!

i would appear not to have the chairman to kick your arses anymore so i've got to start doing it myself aint i?

and sinny's gone awfully quiet too. in fact you seem to be getting a bit short on mods......