Posts with Comments by Sigivald
Which countries does the NYT cover most and least?
It sure seems like you confuse "really matter[s]" with "I think people should care about".
(And shouldn't the US circle be much much larger, since all coverage of domestic politics should count; but most state-level mentions won't include "America".
And that assumes, dubiously, that the only thing that counts is political coverage.
Which is added to the as-already-mentioned-by-others dubious assumption that the Times is a mirror for US anything, let alone foreign policy.)
Israel could be said by others to "really matter" more than Mexico in terms of news coverage because Israel is geopolitically important, both because it's the only stable democracy in the Middle East* and a reliable ally, and because the Middle East is very important to the United States.
(* Iraq's too new to be stable - though the prognosis is good - and Turkey tends to not be counted as "Middle East" despite being very close by.)
Israel's state and its relation with the Palestinian masses supported by its (openly or less openly hostile) neighbors matter; warfare or open conflict there has repercussions in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabi, and Iran.
Mexico? Not so much.
Mexico is also very important to the United States, but it's in a much stabler state; it's not likely to be the focus of a war, or a lighting rod for radical Islamists who want to kill Americans.
Thus it's no surprise (even glossing over the large number of Jews in NYC and thus the local paper's desire to cater to the interests of its paying customers - the Times is first and foremost a New York City paper; about 50% of copies are sold in the NYC area, and about 12% of New Yorkers are of Jewish descent) that the Times covers Israel more than Mexico.
Mexico is boring in comparison. The only real unrest there is in Chiapas, and it's hard to get good reporting out from there, as opposed to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Mexico has crime and corruption, but they're also boring outside of Mexico or the border states.
(And shouldn't the US circle be much much larger, since all coverage of domestic politics should count; but most state-level mentions won't include "America".
And that assumes, dubiously, that the only thing that counts is political coverage.
Which is added to the as-already-mentioned-by-others dubious assumption that the Times is a mirror for US anything, let alone foreign policy.)
Israel could be said by others to "really matter" more than Mexico in terms of news coverage because Israel is geopolitically important, both because it's the only stable democracy in the Middle East* and a reliable ally, and because the Middle East is very important to the United States.
(* Iraq's too new to be stable - though the prognosis is good - and Turkey tends to not be counted as "Middle East" despite being very close by.)
Israel's state and its relation with the Palestinian masses supported by its (openly or less openly hostile) neighbors matter; warfare or open conflict there has repercussions in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabi, and Iran.
Mexico? Not so much.
Mexico is also very important to the United States, but it's in a much stabler state; it's not likely to be the focus of a war, or a lighting rod for radical Islamists who want to kill Americans.
Thus it's no surprise (even glossing over the large number of Jews in NYC and thus the local paper's desire to cater to the interests of its paying customers - the Times is first and foremost a New York City paper; about 50% of copies are sold in the NYC area, and about 12% of New Yorkers are of Jewish descent) that the Times covers Israel more than Mexico.
Mexico is boring in comparison. The only real unrest there is in Chiapas, and it's hard to get good reporting out from there, as opposed to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Mexico has crime and corruption, but they're also boring outside of Mexico or the border states.
Recent Comments