In a world where disaster stories dominate the headlines, this article uncovers the dark underbelly of sensationalism in Western media. These narratives, while gripping, often cast developing nations in a perpetual state of ruin, overshadowing their resilience and contributions to disaster mitigation.
On Sunday 10 September 2023, Tropical Storm Daniel caused Libya’s deadliest flooding for over a century; subsequently on September 11th, yet another prominent Western media crusade began to inform the world of this massive destruction. Generally, natural disasters are known to gain traction in terms of global attention, bursting with fierce velocity to the tops of headlines and national aid funds, only to promptly be cast aside. These events, since their conception, have been caught in a relentless digital loop of cruel and sadistic indifference, a mere hashtag lost in the void.
However, this initial immediate attention drawn by an international audience is because, unlike most news stories today, riddled with hidden bias and propaganda, natural disasters have the beauty of being largely accepted and agreed upon as the purest form of “accurate reporting”. An unscathed story, in which truth reigns supreme. The notion of the falsification of numbers or perhaps the dramatization of first-hand accounts is too blatant for the audience as false, or perhaps, too juvenile, to the point one would assume they would never fall prey to such schoolyard methods of trickery. Yet, beneath this veneer of impartiality lies a complex landscape where the nuances of reporting, even on seemingly raw human suffering, remain frequently grossly inaccurate.
In the case of Libya, it fell prey to the same ostensibly cold pillars of disaster reporting, infamously understood as eye-catching numbers of casualties, displaced citizens, damaged infrastructure, and of course, economic tolls. While this data remains foundational to these stories, it is far from immune to manipulation. Western media outlets, driven by the urgency of breaking news, most likely insisted upon by some editorial executive, sometimes rush to broadcast preliminary figures without adequate verification. For instance, one can examine 2010’s Haiti’s 7.0 magnitude earthquake, original reports were magnified to such extremes international aid groups were later left with a massive public relations scandal as people questioned the validity of this reporting and looked towards Haiti for answers. This, ultimately, caused a massive shift in the public perception of Haiti as debilitatingly vulnerable whilst overlooking resilience within the nation. The effects of this shift are still palpable today as Haiti was forever stained as a chaotic and tormented nation with no infrastructure to support itself. As yet another flood hits Haiti this year, we can interpret the language chosen to inform, as anything but innocent. “Deadly quake adds to Haiti’s misery” Al Jazeera reports, the disdain almost tangible.
What we can conclude from these overblown casualty counts and exaggerated damage assessments is Western media news outlets’ ferocious determination and self-proclaimed responsibility to sensationalize the disaster, grab eyeballs, and reinforce stereotypes about the vulnerability of certain regions. This “doomsday” approach pays little or no regard to local or community responses, or perhaps more accurately gets lost in the shuffle of a “click-worthy” headline. In our vast technological realm of information overload, our generation has become accustomed to the guarantee of devastation. Tragedy used to leave a mark on society, allowing citizens the proper time to digest the news. However, in the name of diverse reporting, we are given access to historical destruction weekly, if not daily. In turn, a facetious paradox is created. Western media can employ this facade of global empathy, yet their stories outside of the West remain like a spotlight that selectively illuminates disaster and discomfort while decisively leaving the richness of culture and resilience cloaked in shadows, perpetuating predetermined conceptions. While Western nations are given the opportunity of redemption when facing ruin, with their steady recovery being worthy enough to be a followed-up story, developing regions are not granted this same privilege. Much like Haiti, one could argue Libya’s flooding will become yet another unmarked headstone in the news cycle graveyard, however, their soul does not resurface in tribute anniversaries or through the honouring and uplifting of these communities. Instead, society is left with a burned image of ruin, insecurity, and corruption, a permanent and unchanging impression. It should not be enough to make the Western world aware of the rest of the globe’s suffering; this does not qualify as a stand-in for progressiveness, we must be reminded of accomplishments.
Society’s fetishization of disaster leaves people clinging to the next obliterating event, leaving these developing nations in the dust after their global spotlight has finished. Limiting our reporting on these nations, especially by utilizing methods of intrigue like dramatization and sensationalization inadvertently perpetuates stereotypes and misconceptions about these regions and their preparedness for such events. The result? An immediate predisposition or believed “supreme knowledge” of these countries when recurring news stories may reappear in the future. These embellishments are primary factors in soliciting unconscious bias. In the instance of Libya, unless you possess a familial connection or have had the privilege of visiting, accessing this news from a Western outlet has already affected the way you will grasp this disaster. What is the reason for this? Well, chances are, the last time you saw Libya in the news, it wasn’t for a tourism campaign to put it frankly. Through technology and the rapid detachment of the user from the product, stories simply do not impact us emotionally. Journalists thirsty for a compelling narrative, transform invaluable raw witness testimonies into dramatic retellings, tangible destruction into misrepresented ideals, and misunderstandings of language and culture into perceived state fragility.
When examining these articles, readers, especially within the context of Western media, must learn to acknowledge the efforts of local communities in mitigating disaster risks to end the perpetuation of neo-colonial ideals. The rush to sensationalize, the pressure to be the first with breaking news, and the temptation to embellish narratives can all lead to distorted portrayals of the very events that demand our utmost accuracy and empathy.
Edited by Amina Kudrati-Plummer
Katerina Ntregkas is in her second year at McGill University, currently pursuing a degree in International Development Studies with a minor in Communication Studies. As this year’s Staff Writer for Catalyst, Katerina is determined in analyzing the discourse between the intersection of media and developing world politics.