In the first few days after Boko Haram’s recent attack in the remote village of Baga, most of the news coverage I saw about it concerned the lack of news. Why, the media wondered, was the media not more interested? As many as 2,000 people had been slaughtered, a figure that, if true, would dwarf the number killed in Paris around the same time.
A big reason the Boko Haram killings haven’t gotten much press is that there isn’t much press there. Baga is extremely remote, with little or no cell service, and it is, by all accounts, a war zone. Nor is the Nigerian government cooperative, or forthcoming, about what’s going on: The military claims no more than 150 people were killed, including militants. President Goodluck Jonathan, who is in the midst of a reelection campaign, hasn’t even publicly commented on the attack.
But even if the western media had been more present, I’m not convinced the western audience would have been more interested. Because, at bottom, there’s a pervading sense here that what happened in Paris was decidedly not normal, while what happened in Nigeria decidedly was.
And normal, unfortunately, doesn’t make the news.
While the author is sadly correct, I wonder if he’s describing a new phenomenon. How much did accounts of the Italian invasion of Ethiopia or the Rape of Nanking actually change public perception at the time? And those were cases of overt aggression by a strong nation against a weaker one. How much harder it is to respond when the conflict takes place [i]within[/i] societies in which local elites appear unable to put aside minor differences to confront an existential threat.
[blockquote]”Because, at bottom, there’s a pervading sense here that what happened in Paris was decidedly not normal, while what happened in Nigeria decidedly was.
And normal, unfortunately, doesn’t make the news.”[/blockquote]
So relieved that somebody out in public is actually pointing this out. I have found all the questions about why the lack of media interest to be bizarre — mass killings in countries who are in a state of permanent war are common — they go on constantly. They are considered “normal” and are therefore not considered newsworthy unless it’s a slow news day.
A slaughter not being considered “newsworthy” does not make the slaughter any less awful or tragic.