:
|
So basically you're saying that our reaction to tens of thousands of people dying is a stimulated response and the media are controlling our minds. Bullshit.
|
No that's not what I'm saying at all. You don't need to be rude about it either.
What I'm saying is, that the media are aware of how we react to thousands of people dying, and they milk this for all it's worth, to squeeze every available penny that viewers intend to donate, into THEIR donation funds.
:
|
Have you considered that maybe there's been a huge public reaction because, to some extent, people really DO care about what happens to other people?
|
You're not paying attention to what I'm saying.
I'm not saying there shouldn't be a huge public reaction. I'm saying that there shouldn't be a media exploitation of this public reaction, and the addition of extra "shock value" falsifications to encourage people to donate further. Emotive language should be banned entirely from news sources, because it's clearly being used to provoke certain actions and feelings among the public at large. The way the media knows how vulnerable the public is, and exploits this vulnerability, by opening phonein donation funds, is a disgusting phenomenon.
:
|
Call me an optimist, but I don't see this as a media-induced frenzy. Rather, I see it as a sign that there is some humanity left in the human race.
|
You're not being optimistic. There is humanity left in the human race. But it's just being whored by the media.
:
|
Yes, a lot of people do stand to profit from this. There will always be commercial entities that thrive on disaster. And there will always be media that sway the general public to the side of paranoia and over-reaction to further fuel this fear and consumption-driven economy.
|
Yes, don't you find it just disgusting? I'm glad you at least somewhat understand my point.
:
|
Don't insult the citizens of our respective nations, though, by saying that they, or we, don't have minds of our own. I think the reaction to this is genuine.
|
*sigh*
Our reactions are genuine because we're only reacting to what we're fed by the media and news sources. The more we are fed, the more we react. What we are fed is a mixture of exaggeration, falsification, and truth. Seperating those three elements is impossible for most of us, because most of us have no way of discovering any kind of facts to prove them one way or another, so we're forced into believing all that we hear unless it sounds phenominaly rediculous, like that "news article" that claimed the rotation of earth had been slightly altered.
:
|
Bush is a pretty bad example of humanity, but he is human. I would be quite shocked if even he didn't put at least a bit of effort into helping the survivors of this thing. Of course I'm sure he has additional motives.
|
Well prepare to be shocked - he has already been criticised over his stinginess in the amount of money donated by the USA to help the tsunami aid effort. Also, the money doesn't even belong to Bush, it belongs to the taxpayer. So you could be donating even if you're not. Bush hasn't donated a single penny of his own money.
:
|
I'm not really a big donator. I'm an opportunist. I give money to street musicians and those Santa guys that ring bells around Xmas, put change in the collection tin at my school for hospitals, breast cancer funds and the like, but I don't really go out of my way to help people. Come to think of it, I don't really know how to contact any large-scale charities. I haven't even heard of any for this situation. Maybe I should actually read the news once in a while.
|
And why haven't you heard of any for this situation? Because the media wants you to donate into THEIR funds. They have even monopolised the charity.
It's sick.
Gigantic Tsunamis kill over 100K
) to a warning system that would monitor both sesimic activity and wave height. Had this been in place for this tsunami I doubt it would've saved many in Indonesia (where the tsunami traveled very quickly), but in areas such as India many lives probably could've been saved. I'm all for it.