deaths / media / sympathy
Discussion
I don't want to offend anyone, but this has been confusing me for a while.
I don't understand why when certain people die, the media whips up a frenzy and the public fall in line and throw money/sympathy in return.
The Madeleine Mccann story was the first that started to wind me up. I have no idea about why this particular child, among several thousand who go missing every year, was plastered over every paper for weeks on end and is still mentioned regularly whenever possible.
The girl who died in the marathon was slightly more understandable as it was during a major sporting event and in unusual circumstances, but I still fail to see where the outpouring of sympathy comes from. Obviously if you were connected with her in any way it was tragic, but if you'd never met her or had any connection to her, why do you feel more sympathy for her than you do for the thousands of decent strangers who die all the time?
I find people getting upset about Diana or other celebrities very strange, and I find this equally bizarre.
i'm not particularly hard either, i cried when the dog died. Because I knew the dog.
I don't understand why when certain people die, the media whips up a frenzy and the public fall in line and throw money/sympathy in return.
The Madeleine Mccann story was the first that started to wind me up. I have no idea about why this particular child, among several thousand who go missing every year, was plastered over every paper for weeks on end and is still mentioned regularly whenever possible.
The girl who died in the marathon was slightly more understandable as it was during a major sporting event and in unusual circumstances, but I still fail to see where the outpouring of sympathy comes from. Obviously if you were connected with her in any way it was tragic, but if you'd never met her or had any connection to her, why do you feel more sympathy for her than you do for the thousands of decent strangers who die all the time?
I find people getting upset about Diana or other celebrities very strange, and I find this equally bizarre.
i'm not particularly hard either, i cried when the dog died. Because I knew the dog.
Because the proles worship "celebrities"? 
I've said what you've said many times. My gf told me once that where she used to work people discussed "celebrities" and soap-opera characters and their related lives and tribulations as though:
a) the soap-opera characters were real people
b) the celebrities were people they knew personally
I've said what you've said many times. My gf told me once that where she used to work people discussed "celebrities" and soap-opera characters and their related lives and tribulations as though:
a) the soap-opera characters were real people
b) the celebrities were people they knew personally
Agree with this 100%. I wonder how many people actually have contributed to The Samaritans this week because they think it's a worthy cause or just because the media have mentioned it and they've done it to be able to say they did it?
My great nan died a few weeks ago, I was upset about that because I she was a member of family I was close to. I see a random person I don't know die doing the marathon, my sympathy is with her family but I don't feel the need or see why I should contribute to what she was running for?
My great nan died a few weeks ago, I was upset about that because I she was a member of family I was close to. I see a random person I don't know die doing the marathon, my sympathy is with her family but I don't feel the need or see why I should contribute to what she was running for?
When Princess Di died a woman my mother worked with was so distraught she couldn't come to work the next day 
I find the discussion of celebrities and soap opera characters described above really weird, but no weirder than mates who are football worshipers and refer to it as if they were members of the team.
I find the discussion of celebrities and soap opera characters described above really weird, but no weirder than mates who are football worshipers and refer to it as if they were members of the team.
drab said:
The Madeleine Mccann story was the first that started to wind me up. I have no idea about why this particular child, among several thousand who go missing every year, was plastered over every paper for weeks on end and is still mentioned regularly whenever possible.
Several thousands of children might go missing every year, but usually they'll be found within a couple of hours at a friends house.Stranger abduction like this is thankfully much rarer - although the media might lead you to believe differently. It also plays on our worst fears and in a way provides a great story (will they find her?) with an all too real cliff hanger.
I think Max Clifford was involved in the PR campaign which would go some way to explain the ongoing publicity. Added to that the Express/Mail who will print any idiots opinion as fact in order to rile up their readers.
wattsie_2004 said:
Because the proles worship "celebrities"?
But Madeline McCann wasn't a celebrity nor was the runner.Some things just make the news over others. Might be that there was a good picture to run with it, it's associated with something else in the news etc. It's silly to think that news stories should be ranked in order of actual effect on the world. We'd have non stop stories of war and famine in far flung places in that case.
RizzoTheRat said:
but no weirder than mates who are football worshipers and refer to it as if they were members of the team.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN1WN0YMWZU"We hammered you on Saturday!"
There's a bloke at work who refers to Manchester United as 'We' when talking about football. He's from Cambridge.
drab said:
The girl who died in the marathon was slightly more understandable as it was during a major sporting event and in unusual circumstances, but I still fail to see where the outpouring of sympathy comes from. Obviously if you were connected with her in any way it was tragic, but if you'd never met her or had any connection to her, why do you feel more sympathy for her than you do for the thousands of decent strangers who die all the time?
I know what you mean but the news is just depressing, recessions, wars, kidnappings again this morning (mm), stabbings, deaths etc etc. The girl who died was a tragic and sad story, but the news of a people donating to her cause for whatever reason was a nice story. And I think a lot of people just wanted to be a part of that, as opposed to doing it cos they thought they knew her.drab said:
The Madeleine Mccann story was the first that started to wind me up. I have no idea about why this particular child, among several thousand who go missing every year, was plastered over every paper for weeks on end and is still mentioned regularly whenever possible.
I thought the Mccan's were paying to ensure the story stayed front and centre?drab said:
I don't want to offend anyone, but this has been confusing me for a while.
I don't understand why when certain people die, the media whips up a frenzy and the public fall in line and throw money/sympathy in return.
The Madeleine Mccann story was the first that started to wind me up. I have no idea about why this particular child, among several thousand who go missing every year, was plastered over every paper for weeks on end and is still mentioned regularly whenever possible.
You probably do, really. An ugly kid wouldn't make page 2 and neither would a fat bearded marathon runner. Sad but true.I don't understand why when certain people die, the media whips up a frenzy and the public fall in line and throw money/sympathy in return.
The Madeleine Mccann story was the first that started to wind me up. I have no idea about why this particular child, among several thousand who go missing every year, was plastered over every paper for weeks on end and is still mentioned regularly whenever possible.
doogz said:
Someone asked me this morning "Did you contribute to that girl that died at the London Marathon"
I assumed that wasn't quite the question she meant to ask, but when i said no, she said "I did, a tenner, it's such a shame"
I just left it there.
I don't really 'get' the London marathon, or any event which happens for the purposes of raising money for charity. I donate money to charities every so often, so why do people feel that they need to get something for their money in return? They wont donate usually but if someone is fI assumed that wasn't quite the question she meant to ask, but when i said no, she said "I did, a tenner, it's such a shame"
I just left it there.
king killing themselves running a race then they will? All the ste that surrounds the London marathon e.g. advertising, televising etc. probably costs a fair old whack. Just donate FFS, you don't need something in return. I don't need someone to cut their hair off for me for me to feel like my money is going to a good cause, just giving it straight to the charity is enough.
D1ngd0ng said:
I thought the Mccan's were paying to ensure the story stayed front and centre?
You'd think they would want to be out of the lime light after leaving their young child alone while they were getting pissed. If it had been a family on a lower income they'd be seen as neglecting their kids. I agree.
I think a lot of it seems to stem from an encouragement to de-emotionalise our lives. Few people seem to act on principle or out of integrity any more. To some, life is a lazy, done-for-them, laze-o-matic loaf where newspapers give them their opinions, food comes out of the microwave, everything is automated and computerised and the TV orders you to stop thinking.
The gutted shells of people that modern culture leaves behind, if they lack the reasoning skills to work out what it's doing to them to combat it, feel the need to demonstrate that they're still functioning human beings to others by gushing out overwrought proxy emotions at all and sundry, and demand validation from others.
Wearing your heart on your sleeve seems to have become a way of proving to others that you have emotions of any sort anyway. It's also manifested in the mawkish tattoo culture whereby people seem to think that every single thing that matters to them must be carved into their skin in ever-more noticeable places (the latest trend seems to be kids' names right behind the ears). Not for their benefit, but for yours: 'LOOK, I AM HUMAN! I HAVE FEELINGS! LOOK AT ME HAVING FEELINGS! VALIDATE ME!'
In a world where every burp and belch is broadcast on Facebook it seems that if you aren't marketing your feelings to others, then 'officially' you don't have any at all.
It's a shameful state of affairs, a mass cultural malaise that's really got its claws into British society, and it needs actively reversing, not dejected defeatism while it continues to fester.
I think a lot of it seems to stem from an encouragement to de-emotionalise our lives. Few people seem to act on principle or out of integrity any more. To some, life is a lazy, done-for-them, laze-o-matic loaf where newspapers give them their opinions, food comes out of the microwave, everything is automated and computerised and the TV orders you to stop thinking.
The gutted shells of people that modern culture leaves behind, if they lack the reasoning skills to work out what it's doing to them to combat it, feel the need to demonstrate that they're still functioning human beings to others by gushing out overwrought proxy emotions at all and sundry, and demand validation from others.
Wearing your heart on your sleeve seems to have become a way of proving to others that you have emotions of any sort anyway. It's also manifested in the mawkish tattoo culture whereby people seem to think that every single thing that matters to them must be carved into their skin in ever-more noticeable places (the latest trend seems to be kids' names right behind the ears). Not for their benefit, but for yours: 'LOOK, I AM HUMAN! I HAVE FEELINGS! LOOK AT ME HAVING FEELINGS! VALIDATE ME!'
In a world where every burp and belch is broadcast on Facebook it seems that if you aren't marketing your feelings to others, then 'officially' you don't have any at all.
It's a shameful state of affairs, a mass cultural malaise that's really got its claws into British society, and it needs actively reversing, not dejected defeatism while it continues to fester.
drab said:
I don't want to offend anyone, but this has been confusing me for a while.
I don't understand why when certain people die, the media whips up a frenzy and the public fall in line and throw money/sympathy in return.
.
It's having empathy isn't it?I don't understand why when certain people die, the media whips up a frenzy and the public fall in line and throw money/sympathy in return.
.
I agree that 'the mob' can behave in a Pavlovian way when directed by the media, but quite often it's simply having empathy for others.
Twincam16 said:
I agree.
I think a lot of it seems to stem from an encouragement to de-emotionalise our lives. Few people seem to act on principle or out of integrity any more. To some, life is a lazy, done-for-them, laze-o-matic loaf where newspapers give them their opinions, food comes out of the microwave, everything is automated and computerised and the TV orders you to stop thinking.
The gutted shells of people that modern culture leaves behind, if they lack the reasoning skills to work out what it's doing to them to combat it, feel the need to demonstrate that they're still functioning human beings to others by gushing out overwrought proxy emotions at all and sundry, and demand validation from others.
Wearing your heart on your sleeve seems to have become a way of proving to others that you have emotions of any sort anyway. It's also manifested in the mawkish tattoo culture whereby people seem to think that every single thing that matters to them must be carved into their skin in ever-more noticeable places (the latest trend seems to be kids' names right behind the ears). Not for their benefit, but for yours: 'LOOK, I AM HUMAN! I HAVE FEELINGS! LOOK AT ME HAVING FEELINGS! VALIDATE ME!'
In a world where every burp and belch is broadcast on Facebook it seems that if you aren't marketing your feelings to others, then 'officially' you don't have any at all.
It's a shameful state of affairs, a mass cultural malaise that's really got its claws into British society, and it needs actively reversing, not dejected defeatism while it continues to fester.
There have been fundamental changes to the way we as a society behave. Perhaps, over the last few twenty odd years or so, 'we' have felt more able to express our feelings in a way that isn't frowned up or derided as much as it once was. IMO that's a change for the better. The counterpoint to a lot of what you've said is that there are a great many people who still have a complete inability to process anything that happens in their lives, especially the big and very ugly events that can befall them.I think a lot of it seems to stem from an encouragement to de-emotionalise our lives. Few people seem to act on principle or out of integrity any more. To some, life is a lazy, done-for-them, laze-o-matic loaf where newspapers give them their opinions, food comes out of the microwave, everything is automated and computerised and the TV orders you to stop thinking.
The gutted shells of people that modern culture leaves behind, if they lack the reasoning skills to work out what it's doing to them to combat it, feel the need to demonstrate that they're still functioning human beings to others by gushing out overwrought proxy emotions at all and sundry, and demand validation from others.
Wearing your heart on your sleeve seems to have become a way of proving to others that you have emotions of any sort anyway. It's also manifested in the mawkish tattoo culture whereby people seem to think that every single thing that matters to them must be carved into their skin in ever-more noticeable places (the latest trend seems to be kids' names right behind the ears). Not for their benefit, but for yours: 'LOOK, I AM HUMAN! I HAVE FEELINGS! LOOK AT ME HAVING FEELINGS! VALIDATE ME!'
In a world where every burp and belch is broadcast on Facebook it seems that if you aren't marketing your feelings to others, then 'officially' you don't have any at all.
It's a shameful state of affairs, a mass cultural malaise that's really got its claws into British society, and it needs actively reversing, not dejected defeatism while it continues to fester.
There is sadly a huge and growing part to vacuous Britain and it anything it creates a real chasm between those who really do need to express themselves and cannot and those whose vapid moments in the public eye are nothing more than steam and froth.
I find your point of tattoos a very interesting one. Since time began human beings have marked the deaths of signinficant others in their own bodies. It is a fascinating area of research and when you talk to those who do it, often they wll speak of a compulsion and fundamental need to mark that person's passing in their own skin. I'm about to do the same, for the vert same reason; need.
It is very,very strange and something I was discussing with my colleagues this morning.
It seems that thanks to "new media" people seem to feel a personal empathy with complete strangers which I find quite strange.
The girl who died during the London Marathon was not the first person to die doing it but I believe she's the first person whose death has seen this reaction ? It's obviously terribly said but it's not that unsusual.
I sponsor people relatively regularly as long as it's for a good cause and regularly contribute to a couple of chosen charities but I have to say this girl's unfortunate death didn't make me want to donate to the Samaritans...as I think someone on here said...surely St John's Ambulance is more appropriate?
It seems that thanks to "new media" people seem to feel a personal empathy with complete strangers which I find quite strange.
The girl who died during the London Marathon was not the first person to die doing it but I believe she's the first person whose death has seen this reaction ? It's obviously terribly said but it's not that unsusual.
I sponsor people relatively regularly as long as it's for a good cause and regularly contribute to a couple of chosen charities but I have to say this girl's unfortunate death didn't make me want to donate to the Samaritans...as I think someone on here said...surely St John's Ambulance is more appropriate?
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff