ABC News Reports Hospital Strike, Forgets Who Funds the Strikers
ABC News dutifully reports a 'nighttime airstrike on a hospital' in Myanmar, leaving 34 dead and 80 injured, a tragic tally that would raise global outrage if the perpetrators were not, perhaps, receiving our tax dollars. While the article notes the military junta’s denial, it strategically omits that the very airframes and munitions causing such devastation are often from the same nations that
fund ABC’s advertisers (and their politicians). For instance, the U.S. government, while condemning junta actions, frequently provides military aid that can be diverted or used in ways that fuel such atrocities, a hypocrisy rarely highlighted in such reports. (One might wonder if the same moral outrage applies universally, or if it merely depends on the geopolitical chess board.) So, a hospital is
leveled, lives are lost, and the 'news' maintains a safe distance from the supply chain of destruction. How many civilian healthcare facilities must become 'unintended targets' before our media connects the dots between congressional votes and body counts, or between defense industry profits and humanitarian crises? It appears some tragedies are just 'events,' devoid of context that might
challenge our comfortable narratives of moral superiority.