http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/02/09/india.avatar.tribe/index.html?eref=rss_world&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss% 2Fcnn_world+%28RSS%3A+World%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
Issues like this are so sticky because the news these days always takes a side but rarely gives us a real context. The mining company Vedanta says that they will not harm any of the tribes and they use sustainable development. Why have they re-settled 115 families so far? Obviously the company is looking out for themselves, but what's really going on? Why would the dongria kondh make these accusations if they are not being harmed. How will this mine help the local inhabitants? Will it?
I am happy that big blockbusters like Avatar can stimulate a real world debate about these real issues, but what happens now?Once again this takes me back to binary logic. We always have to choose good or bad and we are only presented with this much information to make that choice. When we hear from both sides, like in this article, who are we suppose to believe? I am full of questions and have few answers.
Now with Avatar fading in the spotlight will this issue? Will we ever see what ended up happening to the Dongria Kondh? Did James Cameron respond to the human rights calling?All of our panties are up in a bundle about Avatar, but how concerned are we about these real world issues? Would we have ever seen this artlicle if Avatar had never come out? I think not.
Unfortunately the point I'm trying to make is that todays people are interested in hollywood and celebrities. If a real world issue can discussed and brought to the masses because of a movie then great, but it seems that this happens very rarely. If hollywood made more movies about real issues would people become more interested in current events, or would people become disinterested in hollywood?
No comments:
Post a Comment