marharth Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 Your right, it is a once in a life time wedding. But its just that, a wedding. All it is is a big wedding. Nothing is new about weddings. There is a difference between people dying by everyday means, and people dying by certain large events. Tornadoes happen a lot, sure. Terrorists also kill people a lot, so 9/11 clearly didn't matter right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marxist ßastard Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 It is really imprudent to compare a tornado to 9/11. Like, really, really imprudent. And by imprudent I mean stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 It is really imprudent to compare a tornado to 9/11. Like, really, really imprudent. And by imprudent I mean stupid.I didn't compare a tornado to 9/11 It is stupid to compare everyday deaths to a single large storm however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokenergy Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 You are comparing things that kill people to something that you could never see again. No one wants to live in a sad and miserable life and heck the wedding was the only good thing that has happened in 2011 so far. No one's saying that people are apathetic to death but if people keep on seeing death after death after death, then people will be desensitised and don't care anymore. You need good news to counter the bad news, especially since everyone wanted them to go down the alter for years now. It's called media balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Your right, it is a once in a life time wedding.But its just that, a wedding. All it is is a big wedding. Nothing is new about weddings.There is a difference between people dying by everyday means, and people dying by certain large events.Tornadoes happen a lot, sure. Terrorists also kill people a lot, so 9/11 clearly didn't matter right?It's clear that you don't see the point, so be it. The wedding is over most of us except you enjoyed it and saw the validity of why it had coverage. If the deaths in other parts of the world still upset you send flowers, donate your time but kindly stop whinging on about the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. To my British friends thanks for the spectacle, it was bloody brilliant to watch. We broke out the good bubbly to celebrate and even flew the Union Jack for the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 Let me ask everyone this... If Katrina happened on the day of the royal wedding, would you be upset that the royal wedding was being covered more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keanumoreira Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Wait you mean that's not a photochop? Brilliant! :teehee: The royal wedding is just a marriage between two people in a wealthy family, the royal family doesn't really have any power now besides influence. They have very little power in a political sense, it is roughly a bit more then a really famous celebrity. The wedding clearly has not caused unrest anywhere (unless you count the street parties as unrest.) I don't see the wedding making any change at all. That's what you think... We'll see in fifty years if this wedding truly was important or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retribution Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Let me ask everyone this... If Katrina happened on the day of the royal wedding, would you be upset that the royal wedding was being covered more?1. It wouldn't be2. If for some reason it was, yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 (edited) Let me ask everyone this... If Katrina happened on the day of the royal wedding, would you be upset that the royal wedding was being covered more?1. It wouldn't be2. If for some reason it was, yesSo how many people have to die, and how much property has to be destroyed before it is covered more? EDIT: Death poll at 342 now. Edited May 1, 2011 by marharth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisnpuppy Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 You are comparing things that kill people to something that you could never see again. No one wants to live in a sad and miserable life and heck the wedding was the only good thing that has happened in 2011 so far. No one's saying that people are apathetic to death but if people keep on seeing death after death after death, then people will be desensitised and don't care anymore. You need good news to counter the bad news, especially since everyone wanted them to go down the alter for years now. It's called media balance. Exactly. Now if you are unhappy with media coverage...why not email and write them? Hmm? Seriously...you have like a body count going? How morose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now