During the recent coverage of the situation in new orleans and when I watched coverage of the Asian tsunami on the BBC i noticed they often filmed people on rooftops (clearly in need of help, holding signs saying 'help me' etc) FROM A HELICOPTER. Now, this strikes me as a little bit unfair. The attitude of the BBC and other agencies when covering these things is often one of outrage that help doesnt arrive quickly enough, and yet they got there and filmed the people suffering. I just wonder why they cant take a doctor or supplies with them on their filming trips. Anyone else find all this coverage a bit, well, sadistic?
Jah Bootie
03-09-2005, 16:13
I had thought about the same thing. It's kind of a tough call to make because, on the one hand, they could probably take one or two people out on every trip they make. On the other hand, how do you choose the one person who should be rescued. And maybe covering the disaster does more good in terms of getting the truth across to people who can help. It's not that simple either way though.
they remind me of people who slow down to gawp at traffic accidents. They want lots of gory details and human interest without actually getting involved in the pain. I only saw one correspondant who seemed affected by any emotion (except excitement) and he was angry at the treatment of poor black people.
I agree. Good post Liasia