as a personal default, i take anything reported by the media with a pinch of salt. it's a matter of how large that pinch will be, depending on the article in question.
i'm sure there are those with previous media dealings who would agree that one's words tended to get tweaked, poked, prodded and reassembled at times to fit the context of the story ~ the coverage of the northridge quake of '94 was my eye-opener. yes, there were casualties. yes, there was damage. no, it wasn't as grim as the media made it out to be. my first exposure to sensationalism. reports made afterwards tended to be more muted with less eyecatching headlines. what a difference hindsight can make...
there are way too many stories of late that are circulating around australia.. from the recent mysterious package sent to parliament house in canberra to the whole corby trial and the propagation of mass hysteria with superbugs threatening to kill us all. *rolls eyes* yes, these are problems with potential adverse consequences. no, it's not the end of the world.
the one that irked me the most, due to the high absurdity score, would be the story of kylie minogue's brush with breast cancer. whoopdeedoo ~ she's got breast cancer. early onset at age 36. i don't mean to sound callous, but what makes her special enough to have the announcement plastered on all the headlines and news reports? (while we're on this note, what was with the coverage of delta goodrem's stint with non-hodgkins lymphoma.. of all the hematological diseases she could've gotten, non-hodgkins was prolly the least serious of them all) what about all the other people who are afflicted with breast cancer of various stages? what about those in their 20s who have breast cancer? do i hear any news coverage about them? why aren't they allowed a whole hospital wing to themselves as they recover from their cancer treatment... in the cardiology ward no less. mebbe it was for the publicity.
ah-ha! you say.. she's famous and the rest of the people aren't! well does being famous warrant the application of a different set of rules to be applied? a little voice tells me yes for some reason... but but but! "with great power, there must also come great responsibility..." says spidey's uncle ben. giving her the benefit of doubt that she was feeling pretty ill right up to her surgery, and worse afterwards... one can easily say she had no idea a whole ward was cleared for her, right? then again, what are private patient rooms for?
this whole thing might seem like a case of sour grapes. mebbe it is... all i know is that seeing headlines of well-known people with health problems.. well, it's actually the public reaction and flock mentality the fawning and well-wishers portray that irk me the most. (that being said, i must confess that i'm a sucker for pink ribbons. i'll buy 'em all if you put some in my path. hail commercialism!) the only good thing outta the whole kylie newsflash, other than her being well on the road to recovery, would probably be a greater exposure of the cancer council to the public eye. there are so many other people out there with similar or more serious health problems that nobody knows about. do they blame their unlucky stars that they're just not famous enough to warrant the attention? those who are a bit luckier have the support of friends and family. ever think about those who don't have the friends and family to do so? or those without the financial capabilities to afford treatment? who is rallying to their cause?
i don't know what the point of this rant was.. but then again, i guess that's what rants are like ~ needed to get it off my chest. i think it's just another manifestation of pre-exam jitters.