At last, some progress in the international aid response to the Pakistan flooding disaster! Amazing how the world expects Pakistan to do its bidding in the fight against terrorism, but has been so slow to help with something that is likely to put back anything Pakistan tries to achieve as a nation.
We learn, in the media, that the response has been slow. There are delays in helping people affected by flood. The media suggests that these delays are down to poor political leadership in Pakistan. When this began, Cameron had made his controversial comments about Pakistan in India. Then the Pakistani leader chose to continue a state visit to Britain when the flood had happened. Overall, we have a situation where politics has assumed the higher ground and left ordinary people literally drowning or starving on the lower ground. This is being presented as a political disaster. What will it take for our media to report it as a humanitarian disaster on a massive scale, just like any other?
As a result, I believe the media has adversely affected the DEC fundraising approach by (a) showing the Pakistani political leadership as poor and slow to react and (b) being eager to report that extremist organisations have stepped in to the vacuum to help – a corollary of the fight against terrorism. So, why should the British public give money? Where’s it going?
Ultimately, the media seems more intent on reporting that the British public sees Pakistan as a less deserving choice than, say, Haiti. This is reminiscent of New Orleans and the Bush response. It seems there is something less tragic about river flooding than earthquakes. In reality, there are those who deserve our help more than others, apparently.
Mark Griffiths www.idealconsulting.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment