Just wanted to add that they’ll probably be welcomed as heroes when they get back home. Heroes, because they survived an Earthquake. Heroes, because they were probably protected by a level of infrastructure not available to the average Haitian. Heroes, because they’re American and Christian. I think I want to throw up.
Venting.
Sorry for the hijack.
There are a ton of dead people and the unspoken issue here is that in a visual medium, the TV news is really desperate to put a face on everything. That works with these missionaries, but I guess they feel the thousands of surviving, injured, mostly black and perhaps non-English-speaking Haitians are not as relatable as isolated stories about American missionaries. CNN just did a few minutes on one of them. It’s great for her family and all, but in the face of maybe tens of thousands of people killed, so what?
It’s a little ridiculous to send every anchor to Haiti where they’re not going to do much they could not do at their headquarters. The flip side is that if you’re going to have an anchor in the first place, you want to send them to where the most important news is. But it’s mostly about appearances. And yes, asking someone who is living through a disaster how he feels is just stupid.
Kaitie, Kaite give me your answer, do,
I'm in Haitie, crazy all for the love of you.
Definitely best in a HAL voice.
I stand corrected.
I take another view of this. The ‘news’ is a product now, not really information the way it used to be, but details of whatever issue or tragedy directly associated with a personality or brand. The news people know their market, and they’re selling the news (and the associated ads) to their market, who happens to be the average American who can no more identify with the average Hatian than the average Hatian can with the average American. Further, it’s American news, what other perspective do you suggest they use?
Good thing I watched the Today show this morning. Turns out some parents are worried about their kids . Who woulda guessed? Also, something is going on in another country that affects us Americans. Not clear what it is yet but I don’t like it.
It was kinda funny when one parent said that their child was OK and they were no longer worried - Matt was a little lost for a second there. I was hoping he would ask if them if maybe they couldn’t cry a little bit anyway.
On BBC radio this morning they kind of stressed the “rotting bodies litter the streets/children sleeping among the dead/overpowering stench” angles. I wonder if it is a leeeetle too raw for the likes of Katie Couric out there, and they are desperately trying to show something other than rubble and decaying corpses.
It strikes me that this is the type of tragedy that lends itself to radio reporting. There is a certain samey sameness to the video footage because basically there isn’t much to show. A bunch of destroyed shit and people in various stages of shock and grief. As tragedies go it’s a big one, but as stories go there isn’t much to it at this point.
It is bad. I heard BBC radio warn beforehand that the news reports from Haiti may be too graphic and upsetting for some listeners.
That just isn’t fair.
These missionaries are there day in and day out during those times when no one else cares. Its primarily a volunteer effort wth support from local congregations.
When there is an emergency, they are not equipped to respond, and the best they can do is get the hell out of the way and not become an additional burden.
They’ll be back to help the “natives” when the media leaves town.
When the radio reports are too graphic for listeners, that is Hardcore.
Yes, I am getting the sense that things are too bad for TV in Haiti. One resident who wrote into the BBC site said something to the effect of “Usually, things are not as bad as they say on TV, but this time, they are worse.”
You can see him in action here:
not unlike computer chips, or tampons.
If they report there are 50,000 dead, that is just a number that no one can relate to. You need a face to make it all personal.
American missionaries are a good face to put on this tragedy because Americans can relate to them, being from the same county, and they can interview them, because they speak the same language. I don’t think it’s fair to assume they are only focusing on them because we don’t care about the average Haitians, but because we need a specific person to root for and care about it the face of this huge tragedy.
And if a church is thrilled that the people they personally know are safe, well I don’t see how you can complain about that. We all care more about people we know than random strangers.
But I think the news has also been showing how average strangers are dealing with this. http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/01/14/haiti.rescues/index.html?hpt=T2 This is on the CNN front page and it is about a 13 year old Haitian girl pulled from the wreckage by her family and strangers.
You wouldn’t happen to be watching WRAL, would you? They’ve been using the ol’ local connection tactic for years. To wit: “A terrible thing happened in [faraway part of the world that nobody 'round here ever thinks about much] today. Tonight at six, we’ll talk to a family living right here in the Triangle who once visited [faraway part of the world that nobody 'round here ever thinks about much] and we’ll get their thoughts!”
I’m torn about this reporting method. If it does manage to garner some sympathy and support for the victims as Mr Smashy suggested, that’s good. But I don’t like the implication that people just don’t give a damn unless there’s some kind of local link. C’mon, 'RAL, this was a tragedy of epic proportion. do you really think the majority of your viewers are that blinkered and insular? Really?
I’m okay with missionaries leaving Haiti for the duration. Unless they’re trained as medicos or in disaster relief, everybody’s better off with them back home. The food, water, and shelter they’ve been using can be redirected to the Haitians. Jesus can wait.
Holy crap, that guy is awesome. I’d never heard of him before. I want to be him. (I now have a bit of a man-crush.)
I know someone who’s on his way. Haven’t heard otherwise, so I assume he made his flight over.
I don’t really get how you can be both mad about networks doing local stories (e.g. interviewing immigrants) and not want outlets to pay to send journalists over. What will they be covering, then? Aerial footage?
Yep, it’s WRAL. I think what makes it so annoying is the time of day I catch their news; they have gotten absolutely horrible about repeating stories within a time block, so I’ll end up hearing most of this stuff at least twice in one sitting.
Everyone’s a comedian.
I am really glad to see people donating money and supplies and offering help - but can’t help thinking that Haiti three weeks ago had the same misery, poverty, hunger and disease and nobody particularly gave a damn.
If it takes a major disaster for people to care, I guess at least some good is coming out of it.