to think that things are newsworthy even if theyre happening to non-white, non-english speaking people?

[Branleuse]

The amount of news coverage about Boston, which although horrible, it seems to have an out of proportion amount of news coverage, considering its still halfway across the world, compared to the much higher number of deaths of civilians in Iraq and Palestine (for example)

Was just reading some international news online and noticed this :(
timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Another-rape-Anger-rises-protests-spread-in-Delhi-as-5-year-old-victim-battles-for-life/articleshow/19631652.cms

Im not sure why we hear more about the white tourist that got raped, than about that.
I could trawl the news for examples

Whats it all about?? It makes me uneasy

Why thank you, whistle!

But not given as much coverage as they deserved

That was to grimbletart

Minor points perhaps, but Boston, MA is named for a town in Lincolnshire; it is the county seat of Suffolk County; it is the cultural center of the region of the country known as New England.

slhilly

how clever you are! I mean that

I'm not sure I am understanding your point OP.

Do you think there is anywhere else in the world where they have a 'better' news coverage?

Personally I have found the BBC website news coverage 2nd to none. I would be interested to know of a better free service. (Remember that Gorbachev chose to listen to the BBC World Service when held captive in Russia back in 1991 www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/history/story/2007/01/070124_gorbachev.shtml)

slhilly thankyou, its all food for thought

I find it hard to believe that anyone with access to the BBC site can somehow find foreign news hard to come by or even ignored. I doubt those kinds of people actually care that much as they clearly don't bother looking in even the most obvious place. These are the current BBC headlines on the front page for what it's worth (Aside from the Boston bombings):

Serbia and Kosovo in landmark accord
Twelve dead in Texas blast
Pakistani police arrest Musharraf
Bahrain protest draws thousands
'Raped' Delhi girl in critical state
French Cameroon hostages freed
South Sudan army 'killed nurses'

Seems pretty good representation to me.

Pleasure, Branleuse. Hope it's useful

Yes, slhilly, that was a particularly good post.

I wish I could do stuff like that.

In the meantime I'll just rave and rant.

But Bob, this issue being discussed is appropriate prominence, not access. These are clearly not the same thing at all. To take your example, the BBC news frontpage is currently giving most prominence to the Boston bombing: it takes up the most screen real estate, etc etc. Other stories are there, but are less prominent. I'm sure that effect is more pronounced when you go to other websites.

I knew there would be a post like this. Sorry but YABU! It's not a competition of who is the biggest victim and Americans have as much right to have news about their deaths reported as any other nation. I personally have seen loads of coverage of the wars in Syria, Iraq and the Israel-Palestine conflict but these are ongoing conflicts so don't get reported on as much as a current event.

I do think there is a lot of anti-Americanism on Mumsnet though. Seems to be one of the few prejudices that is tolerated (and even encouraged) by some members.

Thank you fromparis and complexnumber!

i havent said americans dont have any right to have their news reported.
I asked why American news has so much more coverage and sympathy in the UK than other places that are equally far away, or in many cases nearer.

Im interested in American news. I am sad for the boston victims. Im not sure why I have had so many people on my facebook (for example) very distressed by something that happened in america but very little about things in other countries, EVEN WHEN those things are in the news too.

Is it that we are practically part of America or something???? What is this link.
I know people in the UK follow the american elections far more closely than the french, spanish, german elections. I feel its really pushed and synthetic

Maybe because lots of people in the UK have friends or relatives in the USA. I doubt loads of people have friends or relatives in Iraq.

When the Iraq war started I saw reams of facebook posts about it and everyone was talking about it and going on marches so I think you are talking nonsense. It was very prominently in the news.

I also wonder why you mention Iraq and Palestine but not Israel when the conflict is not one sided? Do Palestinian deaths evoke more sympathy to you than Israeli ones in the same way that perhaps you are questioning why some people seem to have more sympathy for Boston victims than elsewhere in the world?

Branleuse, in addition to the ties that I described above, the other reason why US news is more prominent than say French news in the UK, is that the US is a much greater power in the world. As humans, we'll stare at the tiger rather than the rabbit every time. Doesn't mean we like the tiger.

I wonder if French or German news gives great prominence to the US also?

There's another issue you've missed - this isn't comparing like for like - a bomb goes off somewhere else, it's often clearly part of an on going struggle, and normally is claimed by one side or the other. Everyone knows who's done it. It's covered in the news and that's about that. There's a police investigation, but that's rarely interesting enough for an update on the news until they have a development like catching someone.

But in this case, it wasn't clear straight away who did it and why. It's been going on for a few days now, with new developments, shootings, man hunt, then one suspect dying, a large section of a large city being locked down and people told to stay in their homes etc - it's not just the case they report the bomb and then that's it - it's giving new developments over and over, the story is changing each news bulletin, not a case of reporting the same thing in slightly different words. (which gets old quickly). They aren't giving lots of extra column inches to the bomb that went off on Monday, they are now covering what's happened since Monday, what's happening today.

Add into this, it's taking place in a country with very well development media coverage, in a major city - UK news agencies can piggy back on local news coverage, they will have footage, and new footage, at good intervals (eg the BBC last night was covering what CNN had said). It's taking place in a city with a lot of private indivduals on twitter, facebook etc and they are directly contacting news agencies with updates, it's easy to get the latest development and to contact people effected.

that's a good point dontmind

The news article that OP cites is actually on the BBC website, so not quite sure what point OP is trying to make. The story has been covered.

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned it but coverage of the Iran earthquake has been hard to find. I have been surprised at the lack of coverage for example versus the Texas explosion. Now of course the Boston bombing takes front page headlines but am surprised to see how little there has been about Iran. I've got absolutely no connection with Iran but wanted an update on the impact as I read the original story reporting its occurrence. So when I saw this thread I did feel empathy with the OP thinking that yes sometimes on some occasions white Western stories of horrible news do take precedence over non white stories. To quality my opinion I am specifically referring to Texas versus Iran as that's the comparison which occurred to me when looking for updates.

The terrible things that happen in Syria, Palestine etc happen so often that they don't receive as much news coverage.

It's not that these things don't get coverage, it's that they get coverage, (sometimes lots of coverage) and then the media (or the consumers) get 'bored' of it (I probably mean desensitised), and the media looks for something else that has the impact to make us go, "oh my, how terrible."

It's 'old news', as they say. That is what I find sad.

women/girls get raped in India all the time - if british media reported them all they'd need more space.

marathons in boston hardly ever get bombed

therefore the latter is bigger 'news'

butal but there it is. what about rape in south africa, deaths from malaria in africa, deaths from diarrhoea or malnutrition anywhere with endemic poverty? the stats are shocking but the deaths are so common they are rarely news unless the UN (with a celeb) has an 'initiative' and it gets - briefly - in the news.