Should Spreading News about Disasters be Rewarded ? An issue to think about ...
I have been reflecting over one issue that is triggered by many news posts recently and a while ago. Those news posts mostly were just rearranging or summarizing the content created by other professional news sources. The only value I can see for those posts to be rewarded is because they passed the information real time to the community if you did not pay attention to those news. To reward news sharing is no problem to me at all. After all, this is a free platform and people have rights to upvote whatever they like - this is sort of basic principle here.
Having said that, the only cases that I have doubts are those news involved with tragic disasters. It may be earthquakes, buildings collapse, plane crash, fire accidents and etc. And mostly they are involved with a large number of deaths or causalities. We, as emotional beings, tend to spread the news to alleviate the bad feelings from seeing this.
I couldn’t help but wonder … (borrowing from Carrie Bradshaw)
Should people benefit from passing on the information about other people’s death or suffering? Is there room for debate regarding the ethical aspect of such outcomes?
I don’t mean to point my finger at those whoever have done this before really and I also did not check whoever (maybe my friend) is having this kind of post at the moment. After all, they might just want to share these news so as to relieve their sorrows in the first place without considering being rewarded at all. But IMO we as a community should discuss such issue and it might help guiding future behaviors..
IMO again, I think a possible good solution to it is to donate at least all liquid rewards to a charity fund that will be used afterwards (hopefully we will have a tool or something to facilitate charity). Maybe there is no need to connect directly the disaster and the news post per se since it might not be easy, but by doing so we can make sure that this info sharing has a public benefit side attached to it and those who acknowledge the benefit of knowing this news can reward info passing and doing charity at the same time.
We shouldn’t compete to report a tragedy. We should compete to help those in need.
What do you think?
Note. I will donate all the author’s income (not just the liquid half, yes, that means I have to self-finance it) from this post to charity. You will have to trust me on doing this. But I reserve the right to do it within 6 months (in case it is too small to meaningfully do any good and I need to combine it with other promises I made before. I had it recorded here before.)
america now no longer produces much of anything of worth. No one in america is trying to be creative or progressive as in a potential profitable risk benefit scenario . . .
Thus the primary ingredients within the american economy are FEAR, PROPAGANDA and MARKETING. No one tries (or some very few) americans are brave enough to take risks in a chaotic uncertain volatile world.
Today americans like most people wants a guaranteed 300% return in 45 days. No one wants to invest in unknowns, there are to many variables... People want to know they will most likely be almost guaranteed for profit instead of getting caught in governmental sanctioned ponzi schemes.
There are three types of people today in america, those inventing scams, those running scams and those getting caught in scams . . .
Why try and "sell" the 'news' when no one gives a crap about anything, thus if you improve the spread of FEAR you might get more subscribers. Thus these 'reporters' are doing a great job representing their " shareholders" interests by spreading and magnifying the perception that life is dangerous and your government has no interest in your well fare at all.
Now the " Master Of Hate " has ' arrived ' FEAR is the only real commodity that america has to trade since after a short time saturation propaganda will no longer keep even stupid sheep following the retarded money making game plans ...
america voted for this non-lubricated 'alternative' intercourse. Now is the time people of low morals and weird beliefs to bite their lower lips and stop whimpering and endure the crazy positional sex they voted for :)
This is gonna be such a gas ! ! !
See You @ the Mid-Terms ;)
why do people want to control what other people post? if someone doesn't like seeing disasters, they can refrain from looking, unless they are in it. they could also post more of what they do want to see, and encourage others to do so as well.
I agree with you except I don't understand the first question. If you are talking about this post, then I just hope to initiate discussion. no one has power to control others here. the discussion is even on 'rewarding' rather than 'posting' though. thank you for this input.
disincentivization is a form of control, or manipulation (see control).
you quote this, "Should people benefit from passing on the information about other people’s death or suffering? Is there room for debate regarding the ethical aspect of such outcomes?"
who should stop them? when newspapers use the AP it is called news, and no one questions the ethics of the new york times passing on news of a tragedy they got from the AP. news outlets are trying to make money. is that unethical?
if they are lying, then that may be a subject of ethical consideration.
your example of AP is a good point - I never think about that. At the moment, I can only say that I intend to raise a question but I am open to all answers, hence discussion like we are doing right now. although the terms I use like 'solution' might sound controlling, it is just a quick thought for discussion (for example you are against ideas like that I guess). I won't defend any answers I proposed, but only defend the right for discussion.
thanks again! just so you know using English to exactly understand what others mean and convey what I really think is quite challenging for me. But I like it.
the control issue is, at least, a bit personal. when i was younger, i had been led into the belief that people could be controlled for their own good. since i have learned differently, i am very wary of it. the only legitimate authority over the self, is the self.
understanding is why discussion is always key. thank you.
definitely something to keep in mind. one thing that's neat about steem is it makes people consider the impact of their voice. it has a quantifiable value.
upvoted and resteemed.
thank you!
nice post u make a valid point, resteemed
thank you!
Aa valid point , it is good that people post things here since I don't watch mainstream news this is where I get a lot of my information.
that's also true.
I guess it's OK. If it's just news referral without any value add, I tend not to give any vote if at all.
same here. but I intend to know more about others' opinions. By ok do you mean you can accept a scenario that a post quoting a news about an earthquake killing hundreds went trending earning hundreds of dollars for the author?
I tend not so support such post much but cannot control if others do.
So, life's like that.
This post has been ranked within the top 80 most undervalued posts in the first half of Dec 08. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $6.56 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Dec 08 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.