Western mainstream media values the lives of people in rich countries more. People have to die in the thousands in a non-political tragedy in poor countries to get a similar amount of coverage as the death of a white Australian mountain climber in Indonesia. –Tamara Pearson, veteran journalist based in Latin America (See article here)
Western media has been the subject of intense debate in Kenya – and globally – following the January 15 attack on Dusit Hotel in Nairobi. A day after the incident, Britain’s Daily Mail newspaper reported that:
“A British man and an American woman are among the 14 people killed when gunmen sprayed guests with bullets and a suicide bomber blew himself up in a terror attack on a luxury hotel in Kenya.”
In it is initial report on the attack, the New York Times began its story as follows:
“A luxury hotel and an office complex housing foreign companies in Nairobi came under heavy attack by Shabab militants on Tuesday.”
Foreign nationals and businesses in some far away third world country are of greater news value to western mainstream media than the miserable lives of locals who die like flies daily from many causes anyway.
The defence is the news value of proximity. Western media, which likes to think of itself as international media, writes for Western audiences who are more interested in their own than what happens to the rest of the world.
But is that the sole justification for an exclusive report by Britain’s the Sun, highlighting the heroic efforts of a single British Special Air force Service (SAS) soldier who apparently saved many lives at Dusit?
“Tooled-up SAS hero led charge into Kenya hotel to kill terrorists and rush victims to safety as fanatics slaughtered 14,” the headline read.
“A lone SAS man was hailed a hero of the Kenya terror siege — after storming in to wipe out attackers and save civilians,” the Sun reported.
After getting kitted out, dramatic photos show the hero charging into a building single-handed — Colt Canada C8 assault rifle at the ready — to free cowering locals.”
The paper carried seven pictures of the SAS “hero” in one report.
Apparently, Kenya’s security forces stood by impotently, tears rolling down their cheeks as they mumbled prayers to their ancestors while the “white saviour” rescued “cowering locals.”
This is the boilerplate western media coverage of Africa inspired, no doubt, by the ideology of white supremacy.
It exposes the façade of internationalism, the so-called “global village” or the “international community” one often hears about in imperialist posturing.
How international is “international media” that frames an African story this way?
The reporting of last week’s attack revealed, for the umpteenth time, the racist biases of western media against Africa and the global south generally.
Among the 50 photos and video clips published by the Daily Mail about the Dusit attack, one stood out. Its caption read:
“Motionless bodies of victims around a table at a hotel and office complex in Nairobi yesterday after a terror attack in which at least 15 people were killed.”
The photo showed bloodied bodies slumped on chairs.
The Sun carried a similar picture.
But it was a shot published by the NYT that sparked an uproar among Kenyans online. Those who raised the issue wondered what value parading dead bodies added to the story. Was it not possible to tell the story without carrying pictures of dead persons? Would the paper publish similar pictures if the tragedy happened in a Western capital, say London, New York or Paris?
The uproar came after State House urged Kenyans not to distribute graphic images of the Dusit attack.
“Please do not share clips of the attack at Riverside. Or terrifying messages. It aids those behind those atrocities,” State House said.
The NYT defended its decision to publish the picture.
“We understand how painful this coverage can be, and we try to be sensitive in how we handle both words and images in these situations,” the paper said in a statement.
While wanting to be respectful to the victims and others affected by the attack, “we also believe it is important to give our readers a clear picture of the horror of an attack like this. This includes showing pictures that are not sensationalised but that give a real sense of the situation.”
But Kenyans rejected the explanation. And the Media Council of Kenya wrote to the NYT demanding they pull down the unethical photo within 24 hours or face sanctions. Sharp exchanges followed.
In comparison, all local media demonstrated prudence in the use of photographs of the attack.
The “international community” spread other grotesque distortions of the incident.
The BBC’s Ferdinand Omondi, a well-known Kenyan journalist, reported that he had spoken to one of the gunmen as the attack unfolded.
“I’ve asked a gunman what’s going on. ‘Things are not good, people are dying’, he says”, Omondi tweeted.
How accurate was this? Spoke to a gunman? And how could the gunman say, things are not good blah, blah?
“I grieve for Kenya and the countless of [sic] innocent men and women and children killed and maimed by terrorists this afternoon at Riverside Drive,” Rashid Abdi tweeted. He is Horn of Africa project director of International Crisis Group, the respected (in the west) conflict research NGO.
Well, a crisis in Africa is a godsend for the west – media, NGOs, politicians, everyone – to shine as our saviours. But all they are concerned about is the welfare of their own in our midst. We are still the white man’s burden. We never die in tens, but in “countless” numbers. And they will do everything to exploit the opportunity to celebrate white supremacy, including parading our bloodied dead bodies.
When will we learn?
