From Victims to Villains: Why Some Lives Matter More Than Others in the News

When disaster strikes, the world watches—sometimes. But not all suffering is treated equally. In 'Manufacturing Consent,' Herman and Chomsky introduced the concept of 'worthy' and 'unworthy' victims: the idea that the value assigned to human life in the media is often determined by political convenience rather than objective empathy. This blog investigates how and why some tragedies fill our screens and hearts, while others are relegated to the footnotes of history.

The Anatomy of a Worthy Victim

Worthy victims are those whose suffering aligns with the interests of powerful states or corporations. Their stories are told with emotion, detail, and urgency. They receive front-page coverage, in-depth interviews, and global sympathy. Often, their victimhood is used to justify political action—military intervention, sanctions, or humanitarian aid.

The Silence of the Unworthy

In contrast, unworthy victims—those harmed by allies or inconvenient circumstances—are ignored, minimized, or blamed for their own suffering. Their stories are brief, their names often omitted, and their pain rationalized away. The double standard is not just a matter of quantity but of quality: the language used, the images chosen, and the context provided all serve to reinforce the hierarchy of empathy. 4

Case Studies: When Tragedy Becomes Propaganda

Consider two similar events: a civilian massacre in an enemy state and one in an allied country. The former dominates headlines, complete with graphic images and personal stories. The latter is buried on the back page, if mentioned at all. The difference lies not in the scale of suffering, but in the political utility of the narrative.

The Role of Language and Imagery

Words like 'genocide' and 'atrocity' are reserved for adversaries, while allies' crimes are described as 'regrettable incidents' or 'unrest.' Images of suffering children or grieving families are deployed selectively, shaping the emotional response of audiences and guiding public opinion.

The Ethical Dilemma

This selective empathy has real consequences. It shapes foreign policy, public support for intervention, and even the allocation of humanitarian aid. Most troublingly, it erodes the very foundation of journalism: the commitment to truth and human dignity.

What Can Be Done?

To challenge this double standard, audiences must demand more from their news sources. Seek out independent and international coverage, question the framing of stories, and remember that every victim deserves to be seen and heard. True empathy requires looking beyond the headlines and seeing the shared humanity in every story.

4 1