Contrast California's efficient evacuation of people under threat of forest fires with the poor old folks of New Orleans.
A better organized state or do wealthy homes make a difference?
The mayor of New Orleans and the gov or the state both had there heads up there asses, should statred force evacuation way ealier. Also the gov has to ask the fedreral goverment to intervine, I guess the reason for that is not to violate the states laws, and the gov did not do anything to the last minute. I lived in San Diego are for years and not all the area effected has expensive homes. The San Diego county and gov Arnold just are making good premtive moves.
To my amazement, British news actually covered the Bangladesh floods, although with no where near the same saturation coverage as with the New Orleans and California disasters.Now that the fires are out in California and the waters have receded in New Orleans. What's up in Bangledesh? Two twigs and a fishing line?
This is probably not the reason for the slant on the news, in my opinion. If the same disasters hit Europe, I'd expect the news over here to offer similar coverage. I think it's the case that, in the West, lives in the Third World are seen as somehow worth less than those in the West, although I don't think that's deliberate. The coverage of wars, famines, dictatorships, poverty, and the like possibly makes people who are far removed from it all rather desensitized ("here we go again," "why can't they sort themselves out," etc.). This is even easier if it occurs many miles away, in a culturally different location; there is less identification with the victims as people just like you and me. When disasters strike in the West, where it is somewhat less expected and the population can be more easily identified with, it probably affects the British population more, as it feels closer to home.The call Great Britain the 51st State. It's not hard to see why. I think its envy.