[Santosh83]

I personally know many people who are now doing whatever little they can only because they got exposed to ongoing wildlife catastrophe through social media. Yes, they may not make a difference on a global scale considering them in isolation, but there are many more such people and the effects add up perhaps to make a minor but nevertheless significant difference in the long term.

Hiding the information away only helps the exploiters to win decisively.

Yeah the data is somewhat sensationalist, but still it is not false data and many people who would otherwise not bat an eye can sometimes be impacted into change by sensationalist or shocking presentation of data.

[smabie]

I dunno, speaking personally, the world has so many problems that it's best (for me) to not think that much about them, or be exposed to that much information about them. Maybe this is a bad attitude, but ignorance is bliss.

If I was like Bill Gates or something, I think I would have a different attitude. Only when information can actually inform my decisions does it become meaningful. No matter what I hear about global deforestation, I'm not going to do anything about it. So why even hear it in the first place? It just serves to pollute my mind and make me feel bad.

[thomasahle]

> the world has so many problems that it's best (for me) to not think that much about them, or be exposed to that much information about them

I think a lot of people feel that way, and it's not an entirely irrational response.

Perhaps the best solution is to choose just one or two problems to worry about and try to help solve. Let other people worry about the others.

The "Think Globally, Acr Locally" mantra suggest it's easier to influence your local community and government, rather than a global, hard to wrap your head around, abstract issue.

Some people may still decide that working on global deforestation is the most important thing to do.