Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

kristopher

(29,798 posts)

17. ... the concern so many self-absorbed “Americans” showed for their own health, rather than...

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #16)

Sun Mar 4, 2012, 06:13 PM

Mar 2012

... the concern so many self-absorbed “Americans” showed for their own health, rather than the Japanese who were directly in harm’s way.

This simply wasn't part of mainstream coverage of the disaster. Did coverage like that get *some* airtime? Sure it did; just as there is a range of coverage on every event. However given the severity of the disaster the overall coverage tended to be muted as a result of the public relations apparatus of the nuclear industry being in hyper-overdrive. Do I really need to remind you of that side of the equation?

As to your attempt to dismiss the meltdowns by saying they overshadowed the natural part of the disaster - that was already addressed in the prior post to you.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

THE MEDIA DID NOT HYPE FUKUSHIMA [View all] kristopher Mar 2012 OP

Underhyped was my impression. aquart Mar 2012 #1

With no rational reason to BE afraid if it, why would you? TheWraith Mar 2012 #6

How many Americans do you think recognize the name "Tohoku?" OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #7

Exactly right. Nihil Mar 2012 #21

I guess it depends on which definition of "hype" you use. FBaggins Mar 2012 #2

Media selectivity PamW Mar 2012 #11

Not hyped but Frontline underhyped that day. For instance why weren't any questions snagglepuss Mar 2012 #3

"hyped" or not is probably the wrong way to frame the question caraher Mar 2012 #4

Watch the Frontline OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #5

The potental and real consequences were under-reported kristopher Mar 2012 #8

One clear way in which the events at “Fukushima Daiichi” were overhyped… OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #9

Really? That was a part of the media coverage I must have missed. kristopher Mar 2012 #10

Which part did you miss? OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #16

... the concern so many self-absorbed “Americans” showed for their own health, rather than... kristopher Mar 2012 #17

I didn't attempt to "dismiss the meltdowns." Clearly you have me confused with someone else. OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #18

You do realize that communication is a multi-party activity, right? kristopher Mar 2012 #19

I guess I should be comforted that you only compared me to Rush Limbaugh... OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #20

Your remarks were dismissive and serve to diminish the consequences of the meltdowns... kristopher Mar 2012 #22

Hydrogen bubble turned out to be a mistake. PamW Mar 2012 #12

And the reactor designs. AtheistCrusader Mar 2012 #13

This message was self-deleted by its author OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #15

There was no mistake that there was a hydrogen bubble, and there's debate about the explosion OKIsItJustMe Mar 2012 #14