dyadiccounterpoint wrote:
For instance, let's say a natural disaster happens. The media typically focuses on the tragedy of individuals and personal narratives to appeal to their audience. I get it; it works on most people in terms of generating interest and concern, but I always felt disconnected from that. I'd rather hear some kind of expert opinion on the matter.
It feels like the media is being incredibly manipulative through this kind of technique, especially in matters not relating to natural disasters. I always felt somewhat offended by its use.
I actually lost my home, school, and work in a disaster that was quite heavily covered by media here in the USA a few years back. Even to this day I don't know how I'm supposed to deal with people's emotional response to finding this out about me. A lot of them seem to want to convey their emotional reactions to --and I am not kidding--
watching it on TV. Sometimes they will even tell me what they think about the whole thing based on the TV they've watched, oversimplifying the whole issue or saying "why would people live there anyway." -and they tell me I can't read a room.
Other people choose a less wordy, more uncomfortable body language approach: lots of intense eye contact, sometimes a shoulder squeeze. If I'm not careful I get straight-up hugged. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not against a good consensual hug once in a while, but talking about this part of my life is usually not my choice of conversation topic, so when it does come up I feel like what follows is a bit forced upon me.
It's like, please, go get your inspiration porn somewhere else. I am not here to soothe your feelings. I just want to live my life and not be reminded about the worst, scariest part of it constantly.
I guess that was not 100% what the OP was talking about, but basically I consider this to be another side effect of sensationalizing media.