I looked at the the Times this morning and shook my head in disbelief. The front-page story was about Gordon Brown paying out £2.7 billion to end the ongoing 10p tax crisis.
That’s right, can you believe it? In the opening paragraph, the newspaper said it was the biggest financial and political U-turn of modern times.
However, reading about Gordon Brown did not send shockwaves running though my head.
After gazing at the small-print on the right-hand side of the page, I soon discovered that hundreds of children had been killed….in China.
An earthquake, the second national disaster in a matter of weeks following the Burma cyclone, had caused around 12,000 deaths in China.
Therefore, it appears that income tax and the British economy is more newsworthy than the tragic and sudden loss of around 12,000 people.
A shocking state of affairs, don’t you think? Why should money be regarded as more important than the lives of thousands of innocent people?
In response to this question, a journalist would probably utter the words ‘news values’.
In technical terms, the news value of ‘proximity’ would dictate that stories closer to home are deemed more important than stories occurring on the other side of the world. As long as something doesn’t happen in our back yard, it’s of little relevance and importance anyway.
However, there are notable exceptions to this rule. When Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in August 2005, news of the disaster was splashed over the front pages of most British newspapers.
The USA is thousands of miles away, yet our newspapers believed it was necessary to give this story greater coverage.
Of course, an expert is not required to work out the reasoning behind this. Events in the USA are seen as more important for political reasons.
But in reality, this shouldn’t be the case. A life in the United States should not be worth more than a life in China, or Burma for that matter.
What’s even more disappointing is that the Times printed a massive picture of housing minister Caroline Flint, alongside a miniscule picture of a suffering Chinese child.
Taking into account news values, an earthquake in China should be deemed more important than housing policy. What angers me is that I had to strain my tired reading eyes to notice a large-scale national disaster story. And other newspapers on the stand were no different.
To their credit, at least the Times devoted a double-page spread on pages 8 and 9 to the Chinese earthquake. And a comment piece incorporating the Burma cyclone was also present.
But this is no consolation for readers who may have lost loved ones or close friends in China.
However, perhaps the media is not completely to blame. After all, newspapers are designed to inform its readers.
It’s human nature to worry about your own problems in your own country. And Gordon Brown’s U-turn was a significant political event which could drastically improve many British lives.
But the British press should be more respectful of people based all over the world. The media has a duty and responsibility to place more emphasis on devastating events like natural disasters.
Tags: China earthquake, ehtical journalism, Hurricane Katrina, the Times
May 15, 2008 at 9:21 am
Your statement “The media has a duty and responsibility to place more emphasis on devastating events like natural disasters” is completely true. Especially as environmental problems are only going to get worse. I dont understand how a broadsheet newspaper can relegate news like this.
you said “What’s even more disappointing is that the Times printed a massive picture of housing minister Caroline Flint, alongside a miniscule picture of a suffering Chinese child.” How many people actually know who Caroline Flint is?
Does is say it all that this paper has put money above human suffering?