to think the media gives far too much attention to terrorist deaths and ignores bigger threats(16 Posts)
Every single preventable death is tragic. However very very few people are killed by terrorists and there are much bigger threats out there. Lbc have made a big thing about the London bombing 10 years ago and I really don't see the need for it. A much bigger risk is the air quality in London that is estimated to kill 20'000 every single year. This has got worse with the push over to diesel engines that are far worse for us,but happen to have a lower co2 so are taxed less. Issues like this are real issues that should be addressed IMO.
There is no way air quality caused 20,000 deaths
A contributory factor to an underlying condition, sure - but not deaths.
I think, for the people caught up in 7/7 it was important to mark the anniversary - yabu
it's like complaining people who are selling deckchairs aren't doing enough to combat battery farming
But doesn't making the anniversary just give the attention and fear they wanted? It affected a minority of people in London, I think it would be better if it wasn't broadcast nationally. I think they uped the anti with it due to the Tunisia attacks.
Either way air pollution kills far far more people in London and little is done.
I agree to a point, having lived through the 1970s/1980s/1990s when there was a lot of terrorist activity in the UK. Im not so scared to be out and about in a big city nowadays as I was back then. I perceived the threat as being closer to home back then as there were two bombings near to where I live in places I either worked in or visited regularly (the Manchester and Warrington bombings). There's always been a threat of terror. Unfortunately, no matter what, there always will be fundamentalists justifying their own cause this way.
Given that I (and the majority of the population of the UK) am fortunate not to live in London, its air quality isnt on my radar so I dont see that as bigger picture but I do think I understand the point youre trying to make - we're more likely to be killed by e.g. obesity, lung cancer etc than being done in by IS or whoever.
Apples and pears -Unnecessary comparison if you ask me. 7/7 scared a lot of Londoners and a few thousand were significantly impacted although not physically injured including myself
Not one to dwell I didn't get too involved in the anniversary but found the service ( I'm not a christian) quite moving and positive. Especially the leaders of faith pledge.
Aes and pears - please don't single out the victims of 7/7
It seems to me that a lot of anniversary coverage of terrible events, like 7/7, focus on how people involved have coped and continued with their lives showing great courage, and how bereaved families have found strength, not a focus on the perpetrators.
But I think if you want to make a point about air pollution say so, leave victims/survivors out of it.
I know what you mean OP. These things aren't looked at from a statistical risk / harm type analysis though they're looked at emotionally.
So for eg a plane going down and killing all the people on it will be massive news while the same numbers can be killed on the road every day and no-one bats an eyelid. That sort of thing.
However that's human nature isn't it so while I get what you are saying I dont' think there's much you can do to change it.
Like I always get annoyed when there is an international disaster and the papers and news goes on about the British casualties and I think well they aren't more bloody important than all the other ones are they. But, again, that seems to be the way generally people think / these things go.
Oh just reading thread "Given that I (and the majority of the population of the UK) am fortunate not to live in London"!! Odd comment - lots of people love it here! And don't consider themselves to be unfortunate at all.
Also how they always report that someone has died / been murdered / etc at Glastonbury. Well there's tens of thousands of people there it's hardly surprising and that goes on every day everywhere anyway why is this different?
But it is apparently and so gets reported.
A much bigger risk is the air quality in London that is estimated to kill 20'000 every single year
I don't know enough about this. Actually kills 20,000 people per year? Can you link to the source please?
I think road deaths are also ignored , several thousand people die in the roads each year, this accepted as normal, if it was due to terrorism or even train/ air crashes it would be constant headline news.
YY bikerun that's one of my bugbears. Because cars and other vehicles are so useful though people are prepared to turn a blind eye to the downsides.
It's not just deaths they cause a huge number of life changing injuries every year the numbers are shocking. People just seem to accept it as an inevitable fact of life or something in a way that they don't for other things that cause similar numbers of casualties.
We missed loads of lessons as children 'thanks' to IRA bomb threats. My south primary London school was often emptied so the police could come and check it. In comparison to that, even the London bombs seem quite a long way away.
Shocking, yes; dreadful, yes; tragic, yes. Pointless, stupid and unnecessarily barbaric, yes. Immediately frightening, no.
What pisses me off is the way the media talk about it. This many people lost their lives. No they didn't. They were murdered, killed and now they are dead. Nothing they did was careless. They didn't lose anything, they were robbed. Stop talking round death, using euphemisms to 'soften' the blow. We are not babies.
Death. Kill. Murder. Those are the words which should be used. Stop pandering to the foolish and fearful, we need to be grown up.
The deaths from air pollution is bollocks - it is calculated here and splits it by region. It states London is 3,389 a year.
However, the methodology is done by calculating a risk from the pollution and multiplying by the number of deaths in an area. This leads to at least 2 odd outcomes.
1. Scotland, with the lowest life expectancy, has many fewer deaths than Kensington, with a higher life expectancy.
2. Areas with a lot of deaths (perhaps due to old age) will have a higher rate of death from pollution than an area with higher pollution levels but fewer deaths. Therefore a nursign home in the countryside will have a higher deaths 'caused' by pollution than a primary school next to main road.
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.