In The News (Cont..)

[Raven]

Tragic for her family however I hope this doesn't overshadow REAL news like the recent attacks in Norway!

 

A little unfair, don't you think?

 

Okay, so it's only one person (when compared to the 90-odd that have died in Norway), but she was one of the biggest selling singers of recent years and when someone of that popularity dies it is "real" news.

 

It's easy to be dismissive because she was addicted to drink and drugs, but it doesn't mean her life was worth any less.

 

 

[poppyshake]

I feel very sad about Amy .. such an extraordinary talent and to hit the self destruct button so young is just tragic. I hope she will be remembered as much for her music as for her chaotic and desperately sad lifestyle and while it does seem to pale into insignificance when compared to events in Norway, I still find it tragic. It's easy to think that it's self inflicted .. but she must have sunk to a very low place to treat herself in the way she did and for a young woman of 27 that's desperately sad. I thought she had a chance still .. though she has looked terrible recently.

 

Terrible news from Norway, I'm beyond shocked about it all .. what on earth is the world coming to? How could any human being behave in such a way and why? .. why is there so much hate? My heart goes out to everyone there.

[Kylie]

I never knew Amy's music; all I knew of her was from the scandals shown on TV. From that, I'm not surprised that she died young. I wish she had had people around her who could intervene and help to prevent her life from getting to the point it did.

 

I think Kell was trying to say that often the death of a famous person often completely overshadows bigger tragedies. We all know how the media likes to sensationalise things. While Amy's death is tragic, I would also hate to see it take top spot in various news outlets while the deaths of 92 people in Norway go virtually unreported. As it is, I can't help but notice that here in Australia, there is far less reporting on Norway than would be the case if the same thing happened in America. Not to mention I've seen barely any mention of the terrible drought in Africa which is resulting in the starvation of god knows how many people (I would perhaps know if our media bothered to report on it). I echo Kell's call for perspective.

 

I couldn't believe it when I first heard of such an attack in Norway. I thought for sure I had misheard because surely such a terrible thing couldn't happen in Norway? My thoughts are with you and your country, Hyzenthlay.

[Kell]

I think Kell was trying to say that often the death of a famous person often completely overshadows bigger tragedies.

That's exactly what I meant, thank you, Kylie.

 

Another young woman - a 28-y-o mother - was found dead of head injuries yesterday, but I didn't see the outpouring of sympathetic messages on Facebook for her and her family like I saw for AW. All death, especially of someone young with their entire life ahead of them, is tragic. Even more so for the families involved. But when it's a celebrity, we never hear the end of it, whereas when it's a regular person, nobody feels the need to post all over the web about it and I think it's sad that one seems to get precedence over the other when it comes to that.

 

An example with the above story and that of AW - yesterday, the top news on Yaho featured no fewer than THREE articles about AW, all right at the top of the list, but you had to scroll right through to about #25 to reach the story of the 28-y-o mum.

 

I also think it's pretty awful that people who DON'T start tearing their hair out and gnashing their teeth over the death of a celebrity get maligned. I know several people who ahve been given the e-equivalent of a public sermon just because they weren't wailing over the death of AW and dared to say that, although tragic and sad, it couldn't have been unexpected given the life she led. The people that were pointing the fingers were all over AW's death - not one of them mentioned any of the other horrors happening in the world, whereas those who hadn't joined in the "AW is now a saint because she's dead" crowd had ALL highlighted other tragic news items very recently, if not on that very same day.

 

I want to go on the record here - I was no fan of AW's music and I was no fan of how she lived her life - she was a terrible role model. However, I do think her life being cut short is a tragedy and I add my heartfelt sympathies to the millions of others to her family. I only hope that something positive can come of her death and that it can serve as a reminder of how easily a life can go off the rails, highlighting the dangers of "recreational" drug use and alcohol abuse, and hopefully acting as a deterent (or at least making young people think twice about it).

 

That is all.

[paun]

I do not know of the girl who died but sorry for her family. Norway murders are very terrible and not about Muslims but I hear people saying here it is Christian that murdered people but this is all wrong it was political not religious. People who do not have facts should just shut up unless they know for sure.

[Raven]

That's exactly what I meant, thank you, Kylie.

 

Another young woman - a 28-y-o mother - was found dead of head injuries yesterday, but I didn't see the outpouring of sympathetic messages on Facebook for her and her family like I saw for AW. All death, especially of someone young with their entire life ahead of them, is tragic. Even more so for the families involved. But when it's a celebrity, we never hear the end of it, whereas when it's a regular person, nobody feels the need to post all over the web about it and I think it's sad that one seems to get precedence over the other when it comes to that.

 

An example with the above story and that of AW - yesterday, the top news on Yaho featured no fewer than THREE articles about AW, all right at the top of the list, but you had to scroll right through to about #25 to reach the story of the 28-y-o mum.

 

I also think it's pretty awful that people who DON'T start tearing their hair out and gnashing their teeth over the death of a celebrity get maligned. I know several people who ahve been given the e-equivalent of a public sermon just because they weren't wailing over the death of AW and dared to say that, although tragic and sad, it couldn't have been unexpected given the life she led. The people that were pointing the fingers were all over AW's death - not one of them mentioned any of the other horrors happening in the world, whereas those who hadn't joined in the "AW is now a saint because she's dead" crowd had ALL highlighted other tragic news items very recently, if not on that very same day.

 

I want to go on the record here - I was no fan of AW's music and I was no fan of how she lived her life - she was a terrible role model. However, I do think her life being cut short is a tragedy and I add my heartfelt sympathies to the millions of others to her family. I only hope that something positive can come of her death and that it can serve as a reminder of how easily a life can go off the rails, highlighting the dangers of "recreational" drug use and alcohol abuse, and hopefully acting as a deterent (or at least making young people think twice about it).

 

That is all.

 

My comment wasn't intended as a sermon.

 

People die every day.

 

In fact a lot of people die every day.

 

The vast majority will go unrecognised and that's not surprising because most people don't know the deceased. The only way a death gets into the news is if it is particularly brutal or tragic, or if the person in question had a degree of fame or notoriety before hand. When you look at the deaths in Norway, horrible, shocking and inexplicable as they are, the death toll is just a number, it doesn't have a face and coming to terms with it on a personal level is difficult. When someone well known like Amy Winehouse dies, and you know something about their life and circumstances, it is something you can identify with.

 

I don't believe in the Cult of Celebrity, and I don't believe Amy Winehouse was a saint or a good roll model either; she was just a talented young woman who made some bad and - thanks to the tabloids - well documented decisions.

 

With credit to the more respectable news agencies, most of them did keep the Norway story above Winehouse's demise throughout the weekend. Yahoo! (which is effectively an entertainment company) probably isn't the best place to be looking for balanced news.

[Rawr]

I read about that Norwegian fellow today, absolutely awful and utterly (obviously) the wrong way to go about making a statement or getting worked up over how the country is being run but what can anyone do? When someone with no record of criminal or dangerous activity goes off insane like that no one can predict or prevent it. There's only so much you can paint a safe colour with laws and regulations. If someone is intent on committing as much carnage as they can before they are caught, they will do it and that can happen and that's one of the pretty eerie things about sharing the street with fellow humans, which seems quite bizarre when you consider it but it can happen almost anywhere. The gun laws are a lot more strict here yes but we all know in the concrete jungles you can be provided with pretty much everything when you hand over the cash.

[~Andrea~]

Sad news that Amy Winehouse has died. Whatever her problems, and there seems to have been so many of them, she was an exceptional talent.

So sad. What an incredible waste

[Lucybird]

I do not know of the girl who died but sorry for her family. Norway murders are very terrible and not about Muslims but I hear people saying here it is Christian that murdered people but this is all wrong it was political not religious. People who do not have facts should just shut up unless they know for sure.

The BBC say:

 

"The judge said Mr Breivik had argued that he was acting to save Norway and Europe from "Marxist and Muslim colonisation"."

 

So there could be a religious element to it (not that I am saying all Christians hate Muslims). However it does seem from his targets that he was focusing more on the political side.

 

I think those who were talking about him being Christian were basing on facts from his Facebook profile (something also reported on the BBC) but maybe they were trying to make a point that all terrorists are Muslims. We know little about his motivation as the judge does not want the trial to be a platform for Breivik's views (wisely I think). The BBC also has an article on his manifesto but it says little about his reasoning, although he does refer to himself as a member of The Knights Templar which also suggests some religious link.

 

I read about that Norwegian fellow today, absolutely awful and utterly (obviously) the wrong way to go about making a statement or getting worked up over how the country is being run but what can anyone do? When someone with no record of criminal or dangerous activity goes off insane like that no one can predict or prevent it. There's only so much you can paint a safe colour with laws and regulations. If someone is intent on committing as much carnage as they can before they are caught, they will do it and that can happen and that's one of the pretty eerie things about sharing the street with fellow humans, which seems quite bizarre when you consider it but it can happen almost anywhere. The gun laws are a lot more strict here yes but we all know in the concrete jungles you can be provided with pretty much everything when you hand over the cash.

 

From what's been reported of his manifesto it sounds like it was very carefully and cleverly planned too, it would have been very difficult to spot I think.

[Kell]

My comment wasn't intended as a sermon.

I wasn't meaning you, Raven, sweetie. On FB I know of several people who have been lambasted about it, not on here.

[no-1-book-fan]

21 years or the equivalent of 82 days per crime is a ridiculous sentence for a mass murderer, especially if you consider the sentence in the UK is near as much for one murder. The crimes were the work of a well educated person who had right wing and extremist views towards Islam. The people he shot were selected and Norway, Europe and all other western democracies that encourage mulitculturalism are clearly at threat.

 

This guy needs to be dealt with in a humane way to send the message out that people in democratic socities are in the right and that violence, no matter how evil the person is will not be tolerated. It will then hopefully in the process combat international terroism and the threat of an increase in these extreme right wing political groups, clearly driven by delusional ideologies.

[Peacefield]

I'm not a fan of Winehouse's style, so I never listened to her. I feel sorry for her family and loved ones, but other than that I've just chosen to concentrate on news that I'm more interested in. It's not a slam against her or her fans, but I'm responsible for my own time and I choose to use it looking at other types of news.

 

I'm more troubled by the fact that the print/internet/TV media these days concentrates so much on celebrity and pop culture. Sure it has it's place, but let's face it, if the people didn't watch it or read about it so much, maybe they would report on a wide variety of topics and give every issue and wrongdoing going on in our world the airtime it deserves. And I'll admit I do like to keep track of some of the fluffy stuff sometimes - I just try to keep balanced .

 

So, I read the news I want to read. It's my responsibility to stay up-to-date on things which I think are important (ie Norway, the Middle East, US politics), so I don't really tend to stew over news that I don't read. Hope that makes sense .

[Roland Butter]

Yes, that makes perfect sense, Marcia, and I agree with every word.

[Kell]

Me too.

[no-1-book-fan]

I'm not a fan of Winehouse's style, so I never listened to her. I feel sorry for her family and loved ones, but other than that I've just chosen to concentrate on news that I'm more interested in. It's not a slam against her or her fans, but I'm responsible for my own time and I choose to use it looking at other types of news.

 

I'm more troubled by the fact that the print/internet/TV media these days concentrates so much on celebrity and pop culture. Sure it has it's place, but let's face it, if the people didn't watch it or read about it so much, maybe they would report on a wide variety of topics and give every issue and wrongdoing going on in our world the airtime it deserves. And I'll admit I do like to keep track of some of the fluffy stuff sometimes - I just try to keep balanced .

 

So, I read the news I want to read. It's my responsibility to stay up-to-date on things which I think are important (ie Norway, the Middle East, US politics), so I don't really tend to stew over news that I don't read. Hope that makes sense .

Granted there was a point where she had a choice of whether to take the drugs and drink the alcohol, but that was years ago, and if she had an addictive personality to start with it's very easy to fall into a bad cycle like she did. At the end of the day she should be remembered for her talent and not a few reckless decisions she made years ago which led her to this sad end.

Yes, I do think the Norwegian massacre deserves more coverage, but that's just the nature of the British media...the story of a dead celebrity who's drug and alcohol addiction has been well documented is going to pull more mass readers than the deaths (although tragic) of nameless people. It's bad but it's just the way the media is, they'll write what will sell the most papers.

 

I hate how a lot of newspapers *cough*thesun*cough* have gone from publishing horrible stories about her a few years ago, to calling her an angel and a wasted talent (which she is)....they didn't exactly help her by splashing photos of her drugged up on their front pages to sell papers....such hypocrisy.

 

I'm a Journalism student by the way!

[~Andrea~]

I hate how a lot of newspapers *cough*thesun*cough* have gone from publishing horrible stories about her a few years ago, to calling her an angel and a wasted talent (which she is)....they didn't exactly help her by splashing photos of her drugged up on their front pages to sell papers....such hypocrisy.

 

Very good point.

[Peacefield]

...the story of a dead celebrity who's drug and alcohol addiction has been well documented is going to pull more mass readers than the deaths (although tragic) of nameless people. It's bad but it's just the way the media is, they'll write what will sell the most papers.

 

That's the thing though, if people didn't buy these papers, they wouldn't sell. I think people actually have the ability to shape what news we see, and it's sad that we as a public are, in my opinion, encouraging the media to report one type of news story over another.

[Weave]

I'm not a fan of Winehouse's style, so I never listened to her. I feel sorry for her family and loved ones, but other than that I've just chosen to concentrate on news that I'm more interested in. It's not a slam against her or her fans, but I'm responsible for my own time and I choose to use it looking at other types of news.

 

I'm more troubled by the fact that the print/internet/TV media these days concentrates so much on celebrity and pop culture. Sure it has it's place, but let's face it, if the people didn't watch it or read about it so much, maybe they would report on a wide variety of topics and give every issue and wrongdoing going on in our world the airtime it deserves. And I'll admit I do like to keep track of some of the fluffy stuff sometimes - I just try to keep balanced .

 

So, I read the news I want to read. It's my responsibility to stay up-to-date on things which I think are important (ie Norway, the Middle East, US politics), so I don't really tend to stew over news that I don't read. Hope that makes sense .

 

I agree peacefield, I find myself saying a lot 'is this actual news' when you hear more celebrity news. I feel sorry for Amy Winehouse's family but her death was not my main focus whilst reading or watching the news.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Weave

[Hyzenthlay]

The BBC say:

 

"The judge said Mr Breivik had argued that he was acting to save Norway and Europe from "Marxist and Muslim colonisation"."

 

So there could be a religious element to it (not that I am saying all Christians hate Muslims). However it does seem from his targets that he was focusing more on the political side.

 

I think those who were talking about him being Christian were basing on facts from his Facebook profile (something also reported on the BBC) but maybe they were trying to make a point that all terrorists are Muslims. We know little about his motivation as the judge does not want the trial to be a platform for Breivik's views (wisely I think). The BBC also has an article on his manifesto but it says little about his reasoning, although he does refer to himself as a member of The Knights Templar which also suggests some religious link.

 

 

 

From what's been reported of his manifesto it sounds like it was very carefully and cleverly planned too, it would have been very difficult to spot I think.

 

Lucybird is right, he considered himself a strong-believing Christian and demonstrated severe hatred towards the Islamic community. However, the attack was political. But the political attack was based on the attacked party's friendly immigration laws. So, both are true.

[no-1-book-fan]

That's the thing though, if people didn't buy these papers, they wouldn't sell. I think people actually have the ability to shape what news we see, and it's sad that we as a public are, in my opinion, encouraging the media to report one type of news story over another.

Very true, public opinion is hugely reflected in newspapers. People are only going to read something conforming to their views. Newspapers do at times have the potential to form public opinion as well. The rise of this celebrity news Weave brings up is called 'infotainment', sensationalised news for entertainment, celebrities such as Amy Winehouse are used for this. It's a typical tabloid style and is dumbing down at it's worst but it aims at the mass, sells and makes money. Commercial imperative is sadly key over anything else.

[Lumo]

Top Gear has been caught staging their electric cars running out of charge at incontinent and unexpected times:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/aug/05/top-gear-bbc

 

This confirms my view of the show and presenters going for cheap and easy laughs over anything proper. However as I haven't watched the show for many years I'll not comment more.

[Kell]

Ouch - Top Gear caught out yet again! Don't get me wrong - I enjoy watching the show occasionally, but they do seem to dump on the rules a lot, and it's getting more often and more obvious each time!

 

In other news, apparently the whole north east of England and most of Scotland is now on high alert for flash flooding after torrential rain. It's raininghere in Aberdeen, but doesn't look too bad at the moment. Hope everyone is safe and flood free!

[Karsa Orlong]

Yikes, nature seems to be striking back this week (there aren't any pictures but it's quite a harrowing read):

 

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/265455/Bear-s-eating-me-girl-told-mum-in-call

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/seychelles/8705832/Shark-kills-British-honeymooner-in-Seychelles.html

[Michelle]

That first one is very harrowing!

[Weave]