Dinkeldog said:Umbran, I don't think there's a particular lack of empathy when someone looks for news on a single person, even if they're just a movie star.
I understood your view, it would seem kinda vain to seperate one person, from thousands...but for me, it was just surprising that he was there.Umbran said:I wasn't really thinking about empathy. Merely that Mr. Li is not really a separate news item. When the population of a small city dies, the fact that one of the folks there might have been a bit famous doesn't seem particularly remarkable, to me.
Umbran said:I wasn't really thinking about empathy. Merely that Mr. Li is not really a separate news item. When the population of a small city dies, the fact that one of the folks there might have been a bit famous doesn't seem particularly remarkable, to me.
aurance said:It would be remarkable if he were your brother, no?
... but we still have "parasocial" interactions with certain celebrities and identify with them, making them stand out more in our minds than a total stranger. It's completely natural, and newsworthy.
So are you scolding the thread starter for mentioning one celebrity rather than 80,000 people?Umbran said:Natural, I'll grant you. Newsworthy, when compared to the 80,000+ other folks? I don't think so. I just don't find the lives of media-types to be generally newsworthy. There are a few exceptions, but only a very few.
If you really must have an individual to put a face on the tragedy, the wealthy guy who has already gotten plenty of recognition in his life is probably a weak choice. I'd think the gaggle of five-year-olds who now have no parents or home, and who might just die in a cholera epidemic, would put the thing in more proper perspective.