In a conversation with people who live outside Montenegro, and there are many more of them than anyone can imagine, I dare say, more than the census says, it is evident that they all like to see what is happening in Montenegro. Wherever they are, in whatever time zone they are, they are under a desk or at an important meeting or business dinner, peering into their phone screen to see if there is a new notification. They are looking to see if anyone was found, survived, if the flood passed and what it affected, if they know the initials of those who were blown up, stabbed, pushed, hit and shot.
You can't go against that, what would he say Jibbons "Well, I swear I can't do it any easier/ although I left the ghetto a long time ago". Everyone, those in Montenegro as well as those outside it, sometimes try to stay away from bad news. Rarely is anyone addicted to having to listen to and watch darkness, to be pampered, wasted, annoyed and enjoy it. Very few people.
That's why people rejoice so much at the success of athletes, mathematicians or anyone who has achieved something, because it dispels the darkness, becomes a beacon. But judging by people's reactions, for every tragedy, accident or accident, there is a kind of relativization, at least according to the model "it happens everywhere in the world". The one in Valencia and Jablanica, the one in Novi Sad, as well as the citizen of the village in Bijelo Polje can say that. But that won't bring the dead back to their families, who will be looking for answers as to why tragedies happen. They don't need excuses, they need those responsible.
That is why it is not true that the media pumps emotions stronger than a tragedy is real. The media can emphasize, but people receive to the extent that is realistic. If it is over emphasized, it will be rejected. That is why it is necessary to understand that the news is not bad, but that there is too much bad news.
Nobody normal enjoys misfortunes, but only a hypocrite can keep silent about them and not state them. Brushing it under the rug may work for a while, but there is no blanket that can cover everything.
And it's not the fault of the journalist who reports the bad news, it's the fault of everyone who could have done something to prevent that bad news from happening. And it bears repeating, the worst justification is "it happens everywhere". It is a similar method to the one that is counter, but still corresponds: "This is nowhere without us".
Good news is urgently needed. Good news does not happen by itself. They are achieved in several ways: by reducing bad news according to the principle of prevention, by increasing the responsibility of all, but all people, as well as by work. What is forgotten is that the basic problem, the cause of all the consequences, is actually inaction, from which the famous irresponsibility begins. Currently only pronunciations are produced instead of answers.
We also have bad news for exports. There are too few people for such bad news. It cannot be consumed to that extent indefinitely. There will be shootings, so it's a shame that the population census wasn't like a polygraph, so that people even anonymously give statements about how much they drink: brandy, beer and antidepressants. If they answered honestly, if they compared these data, they would see that many people become anesthetized from reality, that they escape to some third state.
What are they running away from? From bad news. Just so that it finally comes out of someone's ass and into the Government. Before people burst like light bulbs. Because the news is not bad, but the news is bad. You should keep that in mind, because you know where everything starts from. Good is known, and evil must not be kept silent.
Bonus video:
