[IncreasePosts]

Why does Gaza get 10x the coverage on HN and other social media well, when what has been happening in Sudan in the same time period is 10x worse?

(The 10x coverage number is from algolia hn search, the 10x worse number is from reported killings in the past year)

[Sparkle-san]

Because there is often a large tech component to it. The United States and Israel have two of the most advanced high-tech sectors in the world and they are playing a large role in this conflict.

[muzani]

And the people on HN work disproportionately in such companies, so it hits closer to home.

If Microsoft, Meta, Palantir, OpenAI, etc, were complicit in genocide in Sudan, Sudan would have much more attention.

[anigbrowl]

Because Sudan isn't a tech/investment hub, and there's no overlap betweent he US and Sudanese defense industries.

[awnird]

The atrocities in Gaza are funded by, and sometimes even committed by, Americans. That’s why a predominantly American forum is interested in it.

[deaux]

Because there are people who disagree about it. That's it. Everyone on HN who has an opinion on Sudan, agrees about it. Something that everyone agrees above does not get coverage.

[YeGoblynQueenne]

That's a legitimate question and it has no good answer. Not just Sudan. There is an ongoing genocide in Myanmar, against the Rohingya. There is an ongoing genocide against the Uyghurs in china. None of those get nearly the amount of coverage the genocide in Gaza gets, or, now the war in Iran and Lebanon.

I have no idea why. I have recently started to grow a bit paranoid and wonder whether I am being manipulated by the media I consume. That would not be a huge surprise, I'm willing to bet most people are influenced by some of the things they read online.

Anyway this is an interesting question that has to be answered: why only Gaza, and not the other genocides?

[manyaoman]

If you really cared about those other conflicts, I'd expect to see you mention them more often in your comments. Are you sure you actually care about them or you just want people to stop talking about Gaza?

[throw310822]

> why only Gaza, and not the other genocides?

Super easy answer: because only on Gaza your government openly sides with the perpetrators, arms and finances them, the media justify them, laws are passed to curb criticism and punish boycotts, and people in online discussion forums bring up always the same debunked arguments and rhetorical devices to divert the attention [1], blame the victims and justify the perpetrators. It's the disagreement that fuels the discussion, the obvious contrast between the right position and the official statements and public propaganda.

1- of which yours is a classic example: "why talk about this and not about something else?"

[tovej]

Because the west (our political and economic system) supports this war, and does so much more loudly than the war in Sudan,which is funded by the UAE, also a US ally, but a far less visible and consequential one. Nobody is visible working the media or politicians to win people over for the UAE every day, unlike Israel.

The aggressor in the Gaza genocide is also pulling the rest of the west into new wars in the region. The war is also deeply connected with our defense and tech industries.

There is plenty of reason to discuss this war.

[xg15]

Also, the conflict around "the area from the river to the sea" in it's entirety is something like 140 years old, with western countries having played a driving role since the very beginning. The Sudan conflict on its own has no such history. (The colonial history of Africa is a different story)

Generally, I think it's reasonable to pay more attention to conflicts where the own side is in the wrong. I don't need to demonstrate or raise awareness if my government is already acting like I'd want it to.