In her essay, Rebecca Solnit shows the shortcomings of the mass media in the face of disasters.
Where they need to be more candid on reporting the general suffering that victims receive in the process, the
media tends to focus on some elements which might shed some people in a bad light. Thus, it ends up either
misrepresenting information or skewing it in a way that provides the audience with a
...[Show More]
In her essay, Rebecca Solnit shows the shortcomings of the mass media in the face of disasters.
Where they need to be more candid on reporting the general suffering that victims receive in the process, the
media tends to focus on some elements which might shed some people in a bad light. Thus, it ends up either
misrepresenting information or skewing it in a way that provides the audience with a wrong view of the
entire situation. Thus, the author aims to show that the media needs to aim for change (Solnit 1). To such an
extent, it needs to be more focused on providing the information the way it is. Such an action will be
paramount in enabling the audience to have a clear understanding of the entire situation. It will also enable
the audience to empathize with the victims and aim to assist them in any imperative manner so they rise
above the suffering which they experience. The narrative aims to provide an analysis of the article to detail
how effectively, Solnit projects her ideas and making a valid statement.
In her narrative, Solnit appeals to the ethos of the audience by showing the ill practices which the
media conducted at the height of an earthquake disaster in Haiti. For instance, while there were many
people, dead, injured, orphaned and rendered homeless, some media sources only sought to focus on the
news which paints the victims in a negative light. Solnit provides a case where the New York Times
showcases a photo of a looter being arrested by police (Solnit 2). Clearly, by publishing the photo, the
editors aimed to show to the world that, in spite of their dire situation, the victims had resorted to looting.
Such an action was way below the belt as it negated the fact that the citizens in Haiti had been affected
greatly. They needed more support from the outside world than being attacked. Most of them did not have
shelter, food, access to medicine and clean water. Thus, it was highly likely that they would seek a way to
survive, given the extent of the agony which they experienced. By talking about the publication, Solnit aims
to show that The New York Times acted in an unethical manner by failing to identify with the fact that such
people were suffering.
[Show Less]