How do you explain zero media coverage of the same issue, in larger scale, in previous administrations? Or about the current wildfire situation in Bolivia and Paraguay?
I know it may sound harsh, but have you tried thinking about it rather than looking for a dismissal or deflection? Of course the media edits stuffs, editting is literally taking a cut of things, there are a hundred million threads buried underneath editting all the time, that's why we should always seek to dig a little more. This though is indeed a large story, climate change is being felt all over the world, bolsonaro's behavior(infantile at times, bordering insane others) and direct attacks(both verbal and as official policy) on science, environmental, indigenous concerns, the fires, the data, images, its all there. It's only been 6 months and this is indeed an international crisis, 3.5 years of this ahead and it could close the coffin on trying to manage the climate problem, if you forgot,according to science we're already missing the mark pretty bad. Try to dismiss it whatever, we could be setting up for hell on earth. Its too easy to freestyle justifications adhoc, too bad it's not actual rationality. This is not left/right dialectic, it is insanity.
This is just hyperbole. Again, wildfires are within the average for the season as reported by both INPE and NASA.
You have to think in terms of geopolitics, not in terms of “forest good / fire bad”. The reaction against Brazil was unjustified and disproportionate, as can be clearly seen by the total lack of similar attacks on other countries with similar or worse situations. Why is that? What are the motivations and incentives? Who benefits if economic sanctions are imposed against Brazil?