You think an outbreak, in for example Belgium, would be 24/7 news in Demorcatic Republic of Congo?

The DRC is a former Belgian colony, so yes.

	▲	TFNA 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Have you ever been to the DRC? Its former colonial master plays almost no role in Congolese society. Belgium made little effort to spread its culture to its colony, rather like the Dutch in Indonesia. Then, after independence, most of the population became isolated from the outside world as central government and education broke down, and the main impact on the country’s politics from outside came from larger, stronger powers than Belgium was.

▲

idiotsecant 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is such a weirdly tilted and aggressive response, complete with Facebook style demand to prove some strawman nobody ever claimed.

Yes, outbreaks of extremely contagious and deadly disease often are major news stories in other countries, and yes western nations often ignore outbreaks in global south nations.

	▲	mft_ an hour ago \| parent [-]
		You might not like the tone, but I don’t think it is a strawman argument. The discussion is about whether the western media is paying insufficient attention to the Ebola outbreak simply because it’s in DRC, and DRC/Africa doesn’t matter. The post you responded to is suggesting a different hypothesis: that the media is paying limited attention because it’s in a country quite a long way away, on a different continent. In line with this hypothesis, it’s not unreasonable to question how much attention the press in countries a long way away would focus on a viral outbreak in a European country.