Reading the two articles for this week made me think about how the United States portrays tragic events that are happening in foreign countries to the public. When disaster strikes, the United States has a reputation of attempting to clean up the mess and take care of those in need. Although many people may think that as a country we are helping another country in need, however there are many factors that show distinctions between what helps them and what does not. Murali Balaji’s article talks about racializing pity and how the media tends to take victims of distress and pity them so that others will help. The example of Haiti shows this relationship clearly and how it affects perceptions of those countries and their people.
While reading this article I could not help but think about the commercials about adopting children from third world countries. I have not seen one to this extent in a while, but they do still exist. These types of commercials usually feature a sad, depressing song accompanied by pictures of ethnically different (non-white) children living in terrible conditions alone. They’re climbing through piles of rubble, flies are all around their bodies, their bones are visibly protruding from their skin, etc. These images are then often followed by a phone number and a voice or even an image of a usually white person, contributing help in some way. These commercials are problematic because they portray the white person as easily being able to pick up the phone and donate money, or even adopting a child from another country when this is not reality. It is not to say that there are not children who need help in foreign countries, but the idea of help is communicated by pity on the situation of the kids. The place of adoption/contribution is not even mentioned in the example I have below. This completely removes personal perspective from the situation. These images that fill the screen begin to create the living image that is talked about by Coonfield and Huxford. Although they aren’t news sources, these commercials show Americans how fortunate they are, making those countries seem unfortunate, and over time this defines that country. “For events and performances are first local and particular before they can become global images” (Coonfield, Huxford). At first families see these commercials and think about how unfortunate the situation is in countries like the one they have seen in these commercials and that can translate into action. This is where further questions emerge about intervening in other countries’ affairs and when help is beneficial versus harmful. The exposure of images of complete distress spread awareness however can create a false image that continues to live on through time. Although it is true that these countries are less fortunate, that amount of aid that Americans can do needs to be portrayed in a more realistic, obtainable way. The over glorification of white people being able to help needs to end, however it continues to be emphasized with living images and commercials about that unfamiliar world, such as this one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9fDpfsorcw
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.