Hurricane Katrina killed in excess of 1800 people and Jetblast got 32 pages of opinion... http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=187607&highlight=katrina

'Hurricane' [Cyclone] Sidr kills has killed in excess of 2400 (and counting) since impact on Friday and 72hours later not one post.

I'm intrigued...why no comment, opinion or view on such a MASSIVE loss of life?

That may be somewhat conservative estimate... More here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/19/wcyclone219.xml

Foxy

Track Coastal,

Interesting question. There has been quite a lot of research on the mdeia reporting of disasters, and on the resultant public perceptions. Some of the things that emerge are:
1. Media reporting in the TV age is very dependent upon dramatic pictures. Thus, the tsunami was a perfect media event - terrible pictures of the event and of the aftermath. In Bangladesh communications are so difficult in the affected areas that media coverage is difficult;
2. The quality of coverage is also dependent on the number of correspondants in the area. In the case of New Orleans there were literally thousands. In Bangladesh there are very few.
3. There is also a big difference in perception between developed and less developed countries. The perception is that in more developed countries such events should not happen (nonsense of course) - therefore there is a sense of outrage - in developing countries this is considered to be part of life (also unfair, butr that is how perception works)
4. The media love disasters that involve lots of dramatic pictures of technology - e.g. firebombers attacking blazes; helicopters winching people from floods. Such images have been hard to obtain in Bangladesh.
5. There is a three-stage reporting process - a. a rather breathless wow! look at this disaster stage; b. a slightly more considered this is the impact stage, usually with a strong human impact element (Mrs Smith lost all her family and her home...); and c. who is to blame? If b. and c. are difficult to achieve or of low perceived interest to the readers / wtachers they got dropped;
6. There is a huge distance effect, both geographically and culturally. The further away a disaster occurs, the alrger it has to be to make the news. This is mitigated by culture -i.e. a culture that is similar to your own is more likely to make the news. Thus, a similar flood in New Zealand would be a massive story because in part because NZ is culturally close to us.

There is a lot more on this as well, but these are some of the key factors. Look at the above in the context of Bangladesh and you will understand why it is that this has dropped off the news so fast, and thus why there are comparatively few comments here.

No criticism implied of anyone in the above, including the media and pprune posters - just an attempt to provide some (academic) context.

Having being to Sri Lanka post Tsunami in relief effort, I thought that maybe we (western society) had become more forgiving and empathetic.

All the posts on trivial self important 'feel good' crap for fecks sake since the first 600 were announced.

Are we becoming that cold hearted?

If Foxy Loxy's link is correct this is quite mind boggling (the deaths as well as the apathy).

In an increasingly overpopulated world, people care less and less about so-called 'natural disasters' affecting loss of human life .... if it is far away. New Orleans was 'close', as is California and fires- we could have been there, the place was well protected, the people we can talk to and visit. It was close to us, it was unexpected (being a first serious overwhelming of the defences). As far as Bangladesh's flood region is concerned, I am aware of it being a regular occurence since a really big one in the early 70s. Doubtless it was a regular occurence before then. One must expect it every few years- hence the large number of cyclone shelters. It is really nature saying 'don't live here'. It can hardly be viewed as a cruel and unexpected natural event such as a volcanic eruption. People do go live there (sadly, many presumably have no choice). We have seen it many times before, we know it will happen again...and again and again. I'm afraid the human reaction is 'boring!'. That's how people are. An exceptional event like Mt. Vesuvius erupting will have a totally different reaction. Once in a lifetime (or 10,000 years) events provoke a different reaction to once every 5 year 'disasters'. Nature was just saying 'move here and you will get zapped'. Zapped they were- we all knew it was coming, it was inevitable.

Becoming cold hearted? No, nothing has changed, and amongst all the meaningless dross on JB thanks for picking my thread as a basis for comparison.

The answer lies, and always has lain, in the brutal truth that not all lives are perceived as being equal. I direct you to post #15 in the following link to avoid repeating myself. Sorry, I've forgotten how to name a link. http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2043069&highlight=chinese+equals#post2043069

The unfairness and brutality of life can destroy our minds if we let it. That way madness lies, as I can assert with some confidence. Life is cheap in most places, we are just lucky to live in one of the others.

Your initial thread wasn't the target - by time scales you posted around the time the cyclone hit, it was more the response whilst the cyclone was having its full effect.

Having dinner with a select group with sublime menu is the antithesis of losing your family, home and those one often has over to dinner. (I've edited my post above)

Your link is most valid and I have in the past, posted similar views on the media and the global 'value' of loss of life. What can be done? This may be the best 'ignore' yet (a hundred or some Americans died in the Tsunami remember big global fund gathering) - this time no westerners, its all 'those poor' people who 'chose' to live there.:mad:

Rainboe
Nature was just saying 'move here and you will get zapped'. Zapped they were- we all knew it was coming, it was inevitable.

Is that like living below sea level in New Orleans in a hurricane belt?

There are at least 3 reasons I could offer for why there has been so little comment here (or elsewhere) on the subject:

1) Humans are not yet an endangered species (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_species), unlike say, tigers, lions and pandas or any number of others. In fact, according to this UN report (http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2002/WPP2002-HIGHLIGHTSrev1.PDF), there were already 6.3 billion of us in 2003, projected to grow to 8.9 billion by 2050. Bangladesh currently has 147 million (give or take a few thousand)...

2) It's one thing to make a fuss over furry or cuddly animals, but Bangladeshis are no more or less hairy than Europeans, North Americans or Africans. Lots of mammals are cute only during a comparatively short period of their lives. After which, most of us tend to view our fellows as competitors: for jobs, housing, benefits or whatever...

3) Newsworthiness...?! The loss of life in the most recent cyclone disaster to hit Bangladesh almost pales into insignificance when compared to the 140,000 dead in 1988 and 300,000 dead in 1970. Or if everyone in Bangladesh owned a car already, there would probably be anywhere between 50 and 100,000 deaths due to road accidents annually, which might bring a little perspective to the issue...

However, I have to admit being somewhat surprised that the usual NGOs or other variously charitable organisations have been slow to capitalise on this latest disaster. Perhaps they're still flush with the unspent funds leftover from the 2004 tsunami? :sad:

However, I have to admit being somewhat surprised that the usual NGOs or other variously charitable organisations have been slow to capitalise on this latest disaster. Perhaps they're still flush with the unspent funds leftover from the 2004 tsunami?

The red cross is there capitalising now...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7100957.stm

Among major donors is Saudi Arabia, which has pledged $100m in aid. The UK is sending $5m and the US will provide $2m in aid, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has announced. What's the point of sending $2 or $5 million? Or is that just to cover the currency exchange costs for the Saudi's $100 million...talk about winning friends?! :rolleyes:

And that's before deducting the costs involving corruption which will surely take a good slice off it all before any aid finally gets down to the level of Mr. Chowdhury...?! :sad:

Tha amount of money the UK and USA are sending in aid is an insult. But then i guess there is no oil in Bangladesh!

Why should the Governments send (the taxpayers) money on their behalf? It belongs to the taxpayer. Governments should be banned from sending taxpayer's (ie other people's money) on their behalf. Charities are perfectly able to send out funds that the taxpayers want to pay themselves. By sending government tax revenues, those taxpayers are being made involuntary donors and their tax revenues are being stolen. Far better that people can decide themselves what money they want to pay of aid.

Track Coastal, you were selective in your quote: I also said:
New Orleans was 'close', as is California and fires- we could have been there, the place was well protected, the people we can talk to and visit.....
New Orleans was well protected, for decades it stood the test- it took a big one to overwhelm it. It was not a regular occurence!

I did a couple of ballpark calculations, using Bangladesh's estimated demographic figures. Taking the estimate of 15,000 fatalities, I calculated that Bangladesh's population grew by that much in about 38 hours. In other words, all those killed by the cyclone, according to the worst estimates, have already been "replaced". I'm not trying to make a point by this - just looking at the numbers, which don't say anything about the human tragedy, and the effects of high population density. :bored:

Life is cheap in most places, we are just lucky to live in one of the others.

A fact I am grateful for everyday.

Luck of the (birth)draw is one I will never comprehend.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the by, when p!ssing and moaning about the extensive coverage or lack thereof, I am assuming posters are referring to the Western media.

And their audience is where again?

Take New Orleans, for example, other than US networks for obvious reasons, why did so many, and for so long, of the other major Western (heck, even Islamic, Chinese, Senegalese, take your pick) networks cover that tragedy?

At first it was the damage to a major city - that would have generated coverage in its own right.

Then it was, in some cases, a not so veiled enjoyment of the difficulties suffered by those fat, lazy Yanks.

edited to add: And yes, I think it's ludicrous to pump tremendous money and effort into protecting a coastal city whose average elevation is several feet below sea level. The port, which is vitally important could be redesigned/moved (I am not an expert on that), but in my typically heartless way, I'd say the citizens of New Orleans had a good ride while it lasted.

And as long as I'm ranting, coastal flood insurance provided by the government? Are you kidding me? Well and good if one wants to live on the beach, but I think insurance should be strictly a private venture. The rates would astronomic, but one would have other options. There's plenty of open land in North Dakota.

All of the above is typed after a night in the hospital with pnuemonia (GASP! He mentioned healthcare!!! How come the attention whore whose name dare not be mentioned didn't come by to ask how my experience went?)

All of the above is typed after a night in the hospital with pnuemonia

Dang friend, are you okay now, or at least on the road to recovery?

"Tha amount of money the UK and USA are sending in aid is an insult. But then i guess there is no oil in Bangladesh!"

Give it a rest Tigs.

After the Tsunami, the USA was criticized for initially committing a similar small amount. There is no reason at the moment to get all worked up with the "who cares the most" contest in the West. Take a good look at the relief tonnage numbers the USA was hauling in Indonesia within days of the Tsunamis.

No oil there either. (used to be though)

As for the Saudis, take a look at that $100 million number. Now tell me how much a private A380 costs.

RIP to the victims

Dang friend, are you okay now, or at least on the road to recovery?

Yep, world of difference from yesterday.

I mean, if I can come on JB and pee and whine, then I can't be too bad.


And I don't live in Bangladesh, so the difference is even more stark.

Anyone interested in reading the reports from the guys on the ground will find them here:

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/dbc.nsf/doc108?OpenForm&emid=TC-2007-000208-BGD&rc=3

Cheers

Is everyone possibly skirting the real reason? Is it at all possible that it's really a case of " there's too many of them" or possibly something along the lines of "well at least thay won't be coming over to my back yard"?
Harsh, cruel, inhumane thoughts, but isn't there a kernel of truth somewhere there? I truly despair of a world where there is so much hunger and suffering in the midst of plenty. Even developed countries with booming economies have large pockets of unbelievable poverty. Some third world countries have small pockets of incredible wealth among a sea of inhuman poverty.
And perhaps, the most terrifying, disheartening thing of all is that there is no end in sight. Cry, people, cry, for a world gone and going terribly wrong. If only someone had a solution that would WORK.

Rant over.

And perhaps, the most terrifying, disheartening thing of all is that there is no end in sight. Cry, people, cry, for a world gone and going terribly wrong. If only someone had a solution that would WORK.

I truly do identify with your sentiments, sadly we have to face the cruel facts of the world when it concerns Bangladesh. It is very easy to say, 'Well that is the way it is, they live in a place that is flooded all the time'.

However you live in an area that has a very high risk of being destroyed every year by hurricanes, I live in an area that is hit by severe tornadoes every year. Why don't you move to a safer area, why don't I move to a safer area? Easy, we don't want to, it is our home and we can afford to take our chances. (However, I love Antigua and would move there in a heartbeat if I could afford it.)

You asked if anyone had a solution that would work. Well yes I do. Nobody would like it, because nobody would like my solution it would be very hard to pay for my solution, but it would work.

Very easy really. You use military force to remove these people in the Bay of Bengal to safer areas. Then the UN taxes all the countries in the world to provide food, shelter and teaching these same people how to live in the new area that they are relocated. Oops wait, what about the people living in the area that these people are relocated into. Well, what the hell, move them somewhere, use the military. I think the last person that tried that ended up killing about 25 to 30 million people, Mao.

Sadly my friend we cannot save the world. It would wonderful if we could. I do my small part and sent some money to the Red Cross for Bangladesh, I hope it helps. :(

Whatsalizad

Give it a rest Tigs.

After the Tsunami, the USA was criticized for initially committing a similar small amount. There is no reason at the moment to get all worked up with the "who cares the most" contest in the West. Take a good look at the relief tonnage numbers the USA was hauling in Indonesia within days of the Tsunamis.

No oil there either. (used to be though)


You boys stateside really make me laugh. Never in the history of mankind has any nation been educated in such selective listening/hearing!! If you read my line again the first thing I did was slag of my own countries government - the UK. All you do is lock onto the 'USA' bit. Perhaps if some of you were more openly critical of your government policy we may not be in the current state we are.

and as for your comment

As for the Saudis, take a look at that $100 million number. Now tell me how much a private A380 costs.

When it comes to the US take a look at that $2 million number now tell me how much it is for say 1 year in Iraq? Or the amount of money made by Haliburton and other questionable US owned contracts in Iraq last year?

I guess as long as you can fill up your 6 ltr pickup you don't give a s**t!

I guess KYOTO should stand for, Kan You Others Take Ownership


RIP to the victims

I'll second and third that!

Then pray tell why did you post this then except for a bashing dig at the US, and for that matter the UK? (Politics perhaps.)

But then i guess there is no oil in Bangladesh!

It would be nice if we could keep politics out of natural disasters, but sadly I guess not. :(

Then pray tell why did you post this then except for a bashing dig at the US, and for that matter the UK? (Politics perhaps.)

Because Con - clearly with the amount we are BOTH sending, even natural disasters are clearly a matter of politics. No need to say 'and for that matter the UK?' with the question mark. Do not be puzzled, we (The UK and US) were all in on the oil thing! Today the UK government just anounced it was going to front up £24 BILLION ($48 BILLION) of tax payers money to stop a private banking company getting itself right in the s**t. With one of this years greatest natural disasters in a third world country we send $5m dollars!! (let alone £28B to a private bank compared with the desperate equipment shortages of our troops in the sand pit)You can draw your own conclusions from the US contribution compared to spending. Frankly i am more than a little dissappointed with my governments priorities!

Tigs,

My point was that I doubt the US is done with it's financial support, both govermental and private. Pull yourself back to flight idle until that happens.

They had better take the money fast. Since it's in US $$$, we might end up just littering their country with useless paper :E

(by the way, I don't live in the UK or visit, that is why I did not comment on the UK donation)

I guess as long as you can fill up your 6 ltr pickup you don't give a s**t!

A 6.0L?

Dang, now I feel inadequate. Biggest one I could find was a 5.8L.

Sometime after the 1988 floods it was discovered that $532,000,000 of foreign aid had been swiped by ELEVEN politicians and moved to their personal accounts elsewhere so maybe other countries are not so keen to send as much this time around?

Dang, now I feel inadequate. Biggest one I could find was a 5.8L.

Hey Brick, I just got me one of them thar 5.8 pickemups me'self. Silverado extended cab doohickey. :ok:



Sometime after the 1988 floods it was discovered that $532,000,000 of foreign aid had been swiped by ELEVEN politicians and moved to their personal accounts elsewhere so maybe other countries are not so keen to send as much this time around?

And that Sir is the biggest key to the problem.

I am surprised that no-one has mentioned the 1970 Bhola cyclone which hit what was then East Pakistan. This cyclone arguably resulted in the greatest loss of human life in any one natural disaster in modern times.
Now largely forgotten and probably for the very reasons other contributors have already mentioned.
Total death toll was estimated at 300,000 – 500,000. In some areas the mortality rate was close to 20%.

With reference to the original point, let me just point out that Katrina made just as much of a splash in these parts of the world as this hurricane in yours. The more "local" the event, the more pages the discussion. Did anyone visit Indian / Bangladeshi forums during Katrina? You wouldn't have found much discussion there...

Here ya go TIGS, this should quiet you down for awhile.

http://www.andhranews.net/Intl/2007/November/17/ships-provide-22718.asp


The US is sending two large amphibious ships with helicopters to aid the victims. I promise you running those ships costs a helluva lot more than the two million you have fixiated upon.
I remember well the flack the US received from the tsunami. Too little, then it was too much, trying to show other nations up.