Yesterday Anna Raccoon posted one of those incredible photographs that tell a story without using a single word – a Brazilian dog by a freshly filled grave marked simply ’305′, with rows of empty graves stretching away behind it – and remarked that the media seem to have found it easier to get article after after article from the floods in Queensland, where the loss of life has been relatively light.

I mentioned that I’d had similar thoughts and have been kindly offered a guest post to expand on them.

So is there really a disparity? Naturally the Australian media have given over whole column inches, if not yards, and a lot of airtime to the floods in Queensland, but Brazil? Well, to be honest there were already ten times as many dead there before I was even aware from the Aussie media that Brazil was also experiencing flooding. I think they can be forgiven, especially as bad weather has also been hitting New South Wales, South Australia and my own state of Victoria, now experiencing record floods in places. From the point of view of the media here billions of dollars of damage has been done, thousands of homes are damaged or destroyed, about 200,000 people have been affected and tragically Queensland has 30 or more dead to bury with a similar number still missing. And as more rain falls in the south it may not be over yet. Hardly surprising that Brazil’s floods aren’t making much noise here despite the greater death toll – it’s harder to focus on someone else’s tragedy far away when one of your own is unfolding on your doorstep.

Hoping for better elsewhere I’ve been having a look at news media further afield, testing them by putting ‘flood’ into their search tools to see what comes up and ignoring any domestic stories. The disparity is hard to argue. In the UK The Telegraph’s ten results contained 3 stories about the floods in Australia and 1 each about those in Brazil and the Philippines (yeah, I didn’t know either, but like Queensland it’s apparently been going on for weeks); The Mail had 8 stories mentioning the Australian floods and 2 about California (2 dead there); The Grauniad had 5 Oz linked results including a passing mention in a business article and a letter, but only 1 Brazil article; The Indie had 2 Australias and a Sri Lanka (somewhere else I didn’t know about). Across the ditch The New Zealand Herald has 16 stories about Australian floods with no mention of anywhere else, The Times had just a pair of Oz related links, and The Dominion Post has 8 items about the Australian floods.

Hmmn, a little embarrassing, although Britain and Australia have historic connections and Mrs Windsor is still the head of state, and of course the Kiwis are next door(ish) and have sent help. Okay, what about elsewhere?

In the US, The NY Times had 3 Aussie, 1 Brazil and 1 Pakistan flood story, plus an op-ed mentioning both Australia and Brazil; The Washington Post had 3 Aussie, 1 Brazil and a South Africa; The LA Times and Chicago Tribune both had 1 Aussie, 1 Brazil, 1 Pakistan and 1 South Africa each. In Canada The Vancouver Sun had 4 Aussie, 2 Brazil and a mention of Sri Lanka; there were 4 Oz and 1 Brazil stories at The Calgary Herald; and The Toronto Star offered 9 on Australian flooding, 2 on Brazil and a blog piece about La Niña which mentioned both plus Sri Lanka. Going to Google News UK there were 8 items on Australian floods, and one each for South Africa and the Philippines, and I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the fact that Google.co.uk’s auto-complete for ‘Brazil’ has ‘Brazilian floods’ behind both ‘Brazilian wax’ and ‘Brazilian blow dry’. I wish I were making that up.

With a couple of exceptions the English speaking media haven’t exactly covered themselves with glory, and haven’t covered all the flood disasters going on either. One, which shall remain nameless, gave more results relating to Toby Flood than all the publications between them managed about the flooding in the Philippines, where 1.6 million small, brownish, non-English speakers have been affected and more than 50 drowned. Oh, alright, it was The Mail.

So is it an Anglosphere thing, a tendency of the media in English speaking countries to concentrate on home first, people wot sound like we do second, people that live in places we get holiday advertisements for third, and last of all people who sound funny and have unpronounceable names?

I’m sure there is an element of that – the media has a target audience and they’ll run with what they think will most interest their readers or viewers, especially if it’s a commercial outfit that needs to make a quid. And then there’s the language barrier. Coverage of Brazil means subtitles and translators, which aren’t necessary in Australia. And that’s for a European language that’s one of the most widely spoken in the world. When it comes to dealing in Filipino or Tamil or the half dozen or so languages that could be encountered in Pakistan it might seem like hard work compared to bunging Channel 9 a few quid for, say, five minutes of Queensland flood footage plus Tracy Grimshaw voiceover. The same applies elsewhere: go to the Portuguese Google and put in ‘inundação’ and the situation is more or less reversed. For speakers of either language the news that moves us is where the faces and voices of the dead and dispossessed could almost be those of neighbours and family.

But to be fair to the media I think there’s something about expectations too.

I love a sunburnt country,

A land of sweeping plains,

Of ragged mountain ranges,

Of droughts and flooding rains.

I love her far horizons,

I love her jewel-sea,

Her beauty and her terror –

The wide brown land for me!

Core of my heart, my country!

Her pitiless blue sky,

When sick at heart, around us,

We see the cattle die-

But then the grey clouds gather,

And we can bless again

The drumming of an army,

The steady, soaking rain.

Core of my Heart, a.k.a. My Country – Dorothea Mackellar, 1911

Those words probably aren’t very well known outside Australia, and even here I’m not certain the first part (actually the poem’s second stanza) isn’t known mainly for being stamped on a manhole cover by Sydney’s main ferry terminal. That’s a shame because Mackellar’s poem paints a more accurate picture of the wide, brown land than we Brits usually keep in our heads. Our impressions are influenced by photos of clear skies over Ayers Rock and spindly gum trees in the desert, by Kuoni brochures showing camels crossing orange sands, by The Sundowners for Baby Boomer types, Crocodile Dundee and Skippy the Bush Kangaroo for the Gen Xers, and Hugh and Nicole embracing over a parched landscape, and of course by Neighbours and Home and Away for, well, nearly everybody but me, apparently. The sun generally shines in Ramsey Street, Skippy spent all his time bouncing around rocks and scrub, and the two movies both featured bush fires – something that makes headlines in real life from time to time. I’ve found out since that there’s more to it and that when it rains in Oz, oh boy, can it rain!

Now Brazil floods a lot – using Google’s timeline I found news articles reporting deadly flooding there almost every year for the past decade. Over the same time various parts of Australia will have flooded – Melbourne’s Elizabeth Street a couple of times that I know of – but the big difference is that there probably wasn’t lots of damage and few, if any, deaths. Compare that to the Black Saturday bush fires two years ago when 173 died and billions of dollars burned. Now be honest, which of those two natural forces do you associate with Australia? Exactly, so when an area the size of two European nations is under water here many will consider it newsworthy. While it’s terribly unfair on the people living there, when mud pours down the streets of Rio the likely reaction is almost, “What, again?” You expect natural disasters in some parts of the world and especially in the tropics, but it’s easy to forget that a large chunk of Australia is in the tropics too.

We’re a physically large but socially and economically small nation, a circle of coastal cities and fertile land surrounding an area so empty that in parts you can feel like the last person left alive. We’re a long way from everywhere else in the industrialised world, you can’t even fly direct to the nation’s capital, and we’ve got an anti-social time zone. Even our Kiwi neighbours are 3 hours flying time from the eastern states – more than twice that from Perth – while for north America and Europe we’re talking give or take a day or more after adding on all the airport security and wishing your luggage would hurry up. Four or five million a year come and see the place for themselves but for everyone else it’s easy to become conditioned to think of Australia as being drier than the proverbial camel’s undies and permanently ready to burn.

The reality, especially for the tropical northern end of Australia, is more as Mackellar described it: a land of droughts and flooding rains, times of dying cattle followed by gathering storm clouds. However, “This Stuff Just Happens Sometimes” doesn’t look nearly as good on page one above the fold as “Australia’s Sunshine State Battles Flood Disaster” next to a photo of a dead kid who begged rescuers to save his little brother first.

Angry Exile.

Michael
Fowke January 18, 2011 at 21:23

Brazil is one of the so-called emerging markets. Maybe as it becomes richer
its people will seem more human to the media.

Tom Mein January 18, 2011 at 20:46

Not many members of the Fabian Society in Brazil, perhaps?

Engineer January 18, 2011 at 20:25

It might be interesting to compare a (genuine) scientific study of
exceptional weather events around the globe with news reporting. Major
flooding in, say, Siberia might cause more extensive environmental damage than
even the Australian ones, but might affect far fewer people. We might never
even hear about it.

I suspect that such a study, if it were ever to happen, would reinforce
your thoughts.

JuliaM January 18,
2011 at 19:22

“…and Hugh and Nicole embracing over a parched landscape.”

Oh, Baz Lurhman, how could you stoop so low…

wrinkled weasel January 18, 2011 at 18:47

Oh do spare me. The Aussies are friends and family, the Brazilians are not.
We give aid to Brazil and what do they do? They turn away Royal Navy Ships
that need fuel because they are sucking up to the Argies.

I am not interested in Brazil and neither is anyone else. People die. An
individual can only take on so much mourning by proxy so get over it.

Old Slaughter
January 18, 2011 at 20:04

Harsh but fair.

I have been getting emails from Brazilian friends, it is awful over
there, but the fact is, to the UK Australia is family and obviously family
come first.

Angry
Exile January 19, 2011 at 01:30

That’s what I said, wasn’t it? There is a disparity but there always will
be simply because the media need to cover the interests of their audience
and they have newspapers and advertising slots to sell. Because of historic
ties it tends to divvy up along language lines. Missed the RN ships thing
but it’s not something the NZ, US or Canadian media would give a stuff about
anyway, and they all gave more coverage to Australia. But things that
surprise and break the normal perception make headlines too, such as a
country that everyone ‘knows’ is bone dry having a lot of land suddenly
flooded. Of course it’s going to make more news than somewhere that has
torrential rain and floods just about every year. Again, it’s a business and
‘Same As Normal Over There’ doesn’t sell papers.

John Levett
January 19, 2011 at 08:31

And, of course, the media is always seeking to reinforce the
corporate/political global warming message. A ‘once-every-30 odd-years’
biblical flood affecting the greenie chattering class can be (and is
being) spun as humanly induced whereas ‘slightly-heavier-than-usual’ rain
affecting impoverished (and, therefore, voiceless) peasants is just one of
those things unless it is picked up on by some third-rate luvvie seeking
cheap publicity on the back of others’ misfortunes.

Consider Moscow last summer: it got a little hot and we were treated to
wall-to-wall Thermageddon media coverage for days on end. But how much
coverage has the MSM given to the current drama in the frozen Okhotsk Sea?
But for the likes of Richard North’s EU Referendum Blog, it is unlikely
that we would ever have heard of the rescue mission that has being going
on for acouple of weeks or so to free hundreds of men stuck on their ships
in thick ice. It’s a tale of mans’ determination and fortitude in the face
of hostile nature but it just doesn’t fit the current news agenda.

Angry
Exile January 19, 2011 at
15:39

Oh, that’s true too, and for similar reasons – bad news sells. And
yes it’s bad news for the crews stuck in the ice but a wider audience
might think we’re not going to be barbecued after all, which would be
good news. That might be why it hasn’t been mentioned in the news here
for more than a week.