• Willer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think that is because the sub incident had potential to have a happy ending…for at least 5 seconds. Also it is linked to a popular tragedy. Whereas the people dying on migration and human trafficing are inherently horrible and its just depressing to read about it.

    • Naryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think that is because the sub incident had potential to have a happy ending…for at least 5 seconds.

      You realise had the same time and effort been used to rescue the people from this incident, many more lives could have been saved right?

  • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Does anyone else see the irony of these posts?

    Instead of also pushing for this incident to get a lot of solo coverage, many people talking about the billionaires coverage in relation to it. When you mention the submersible in relation to the capsized boat, you are now also talking about the submersible.

    Please just focus on the capsized boat if you want people to focus about the capsized boat. Don’t bridge the two incidents together if they aren’t already bridged together in the conversation. Connecting the two incidents just keeps looping the submersible story back into the mix. The discussions have changed to talking about media bias instead of talking about how to stop people from regularly dying on these boats.

    People will pay more attention to this if it’s its own story. “What about” tends to get poor coverage and media attention.

    • Naryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Please just focus on the capsized boat if you want people to focus about the capsized boat.

      The story is about how news media focus on certain topics over others. It’s using the Titan submersible and the Libyan disaster as examples for it.

      The money, time and effort to save the Titan submersible has been huge, whereas the same effort has ignored this incident.

      People will pay more attention to this if it’s its own story. “What about” tends to get poor coverage and media attention.

      There have been articles about this, they don’t get any traction nor do they get sympathy because of the people on board the boat.

  • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure about who this article is criticizing exactly. It’s not like we don’t know about the sunken boat - we do. It’s just not as interesting as a lost submarine.

    If there was a kid lost in the atlantic on a inflatable unicorn nobody would be talking about the submarine. That’s how our attention works. 5 people is more interesting that 200 people and 1 person is more interesting than five.

    • Naryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not just people missing. It’s the efforts of the various organisations around the world that have put huge amounts of effort into finding them when they could’ve saved a lot more (hell 1 more is a lot more) had they focused on larger disasters.

      But because the victims are Arabs and refugees, nobody cares.