Its important for the bigger blogs to get call attention to rescue efforts and the like, because they are the ones that people look to for news. If a major site (in my terms 2000+ hits a day) doesn't broadcast some sort of news regarding how to help these people, how do those readers find a way to donate? Most people, if not given the link (like A Small Victory has done, top corner of her page) can't be bothered to look up a place to donate. It's irrisponsible.

Eh, as loathe as I am to defend the Kos' and Atrios' of the world, it's awfully hard to add anything substantive to such a story.

If you want to fault them for not pointing their readers to places to donate, fine. But a simple bean-counting of the number of posts doesn't really seem fair--for either side.

I can't agree with your analysis here. Although I did manage to find a polititical angle in the coverage of this story, this isn't primarily the type of story that most blogs cover. The fact that so many people died doesn't necessarily make this part of the political blogosphere's beat.

Chris, I gotta disagree, Wizbang has links to video, stories about how the warning system failed, stories about a whole village that may be gone, a story about a baby that was miraculously saved, how to donate etc. PLUS we covered the politics of it.

Many of the other righty blogs have the same. The left largely ignored the story.

it's awfully hard to add anything substantive to such a story

Let's be honest, what do blogs ADD to most stories? Not a whole lot. We act as aggregators mostly.

AND the pure bean counting DOES say something. It shows the level of interest the respective blogger has.

As I said, the left always talks about how much more they care about their fellow man than conservatives...

This measure at least, doesn't bear that out.

Well, that's because Wizbang is a very very good blog.

But as to what blogs add...generally speaking, commentary. I can't fault lefty or righty blogs for failing to link to stories that while informative on their face, the blog's commentary tends to add little to the issue (inasmuch as a tsunami is an "issue")

For my part, I think that unless you're going to act as a sort of clearinghouse for information on the tsunamis (as Wizbang is and has done for other events), then it seems something of a futile exercise to link to stories about the event.

As for the hypocrisy of the left re: caring for humanity, I agree. But I'd rather find evidence for that in what they DO say, than what they don't say.

I'm not saying it proves they are rotten SOB's...

I just find the contrast interesting.

I disagree with that statement that the left arent' blogging this. Seems you only looked at the big boys, but many of the smaller lefty blogs are discussing it, and linking to the videos, and updating the stats.

I only have a single post, though I updated it to emphasize how Michele is keeping up on relief efforts at The Command Post.

I think Chris is right, though -- this isn't the kind of story where the blogosphere, particularly political blogs, are going to excel. Wizbang is certainly an exception, but we all knew that months ago.

McGehee, I mentioned that some of the smaller righty blogs were not covering it as much... but let's face it...

If the numbers were reversed, some asshat on the left would say it was because the dead people had brown skin or that there was no oil involved.

And that horrible Oliver Willis hasn't posted ANYTHING!

Sure, he's on vacation, but still... unless he's vacation in Sri Lanka, washing up on some (RACIST!) beach, you'd think he'd break silence to say something.

From what I have seen, progressive bloggers are, among other things, seeing this relief effort as a fine chance to drop the grand illusions of separation and ego, and focus outwardly...toward those who are crying for help.

Playing left against right at a time of crisis is petty and counter-productive.

-Dave

Instead, the "pwogressive bloggers" are using other people's blogs to bitch and moan and spew their same b.s. What have the left or pwogressives as they now call themselves done that is productive in terms of this disaster? Anything? I'll believe it when I see it.

Do your homework, hun, and venture out beyond the Wizbangs of the world.

I could post dozens of links, but history tells me they would go unheeded anyway.

You may find yourself playing catch-up soon...

Post 'em if you got 'em, deary. It is the topic of the thread.

Paul:

I'm going to have to take exception to your contention that because my (liberal) blog features few posts about the tsunami, I don't care about it.

I've posted once about it, but I have a few reasons for not following every jot and tittle of the casualty increases, DU nutcase theorizing, "stinginess" comments, and the dispatch of aid:

* I have nothing new to add to the coverage. I was not in Thailand or Indonesia. I have no family there. I have no first-person accounts. Most of what I could say -- expressions of sympathy, etc. And pure facts and figures are already reported in-depth by other bloggers.

* I don't have time to be on it like white on rice; like many other bloggers, I have a day job.

* Natural catastrophes are outside of my usual subject area. I usually cover politics, with a smattering of law, religion, and social policy.

* I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the enormity of the thing. 100,000 dead.

--|PW|--

I think what's being overlooked here is the way that the American "right" always finds a way to do wrong. Blogs have no business covering this story. Unless you have some kind of first hand experience you're just piggybacking onto catastrophe. Of course this isn't a new phenomenon. Conservatives have a real knack for profiting from other people's fear and misery.

So, with tens of thousands dead and many more who will soon fall ill with cholera and other nasty diseases, what do you do? Of course: Turn it into an opportunity for partisan sniping. Please. If that's not the very definition of self-righteous, then I don't know what is.

In a time when charity and selflessness is called for, you clearly are not up to the job. For shame.

(Not to mention that is the most half-assed analysis one could imagine to test this hypothesis.)

So the deaths of (likely) 100,000 people are used to club a political faction in a nation far from the catastrophe? I doubt a more self-centered and elitist response is possible. For shame.

This is the 2nd time I've seen something like this, a right-leaning blog trumpeting its philanthropy and pointing fingers at left-leaning blogs. If charity should be done out of the goodmess of one's own heart, why is it so often used as a cudgel? Believe me, the left doing it isn't right either. But as long as God knows the good in one's own heart, who cares what the rest of the world thinks?

Isn't that what Jesus did?

I don't agree with your implication that right wing bloggers are more compassionate than left wing bloggers (if that is your point, I couldn't really tell.)

As for your suggestion that the blokes at Crooked Timber are a bunch of pathetic, wimpy, lame-brained losers, I agree with that.

Robert Samet: Okay. Unless you have first hand experience with tsunamis you should not cover the story or encourage people to be generous? And you call this profiting? What a piece of shit you are. Truly a piece of shit.

Buffo: You ask, facetiously, What do you do? You give money, you cheap bastard. Oh, and your post alone proved Paul's hyposthesis.

Bloomsday: No, shame on you! You are the self-centered and elitist one here. You do nothing to aid the relief work and snipe at people who do.

Nikki: Since this is the second time the left has exhibited itself to put politics ahead of charity, they should be doubly ashamed. Charity should be done to relieve the suffering of others less fortunate than us. It's not to make you feel all touchy feely good.

PW: It's your blog but I can't see the harm in keeping your readers at least minimally updated and encouraging them to donate what they can for relief. It might not be your usual subject area but these aren't usual times. The death toll is now expected to hit 250,000. Who can't find at least one person or story to identify with in this tragedy?

AND the pure bean counting DOES say something. It shows the level of interest the respective blogger has.

This is such a blatant logical fallacy, I'm surprised someone posted it. If a blog's about all news stories you might have a point, but I, for example, blog about physics, so no, despite being a conservative and thus a compassionate person by your argument, I didn't and won't post about the tsunami. It doesn't mean I'm not interested; however, it's not on topic on my physics blog any more than it's on topic on a politics blog, so I'll discuss it elsewhere.

I can't think of anything more political than humanitarian relief work. It's an area of study with books and treatises which can be found at any public library.

I find the suggestion that we leftists care less about other human beings profoundly disingenuous. Moreover, the 'argument' by which the author of this post arrives at such a silly conclusion is either (1) the expression of political pusillanimity, or (2) the height of contemptible analytical naivete.

"Bloomsday: No, shame on you! You are the self-centered and elitist one here. You do nothing to aid the relief work and snipe at people who do."

The ridiculousness of such a response to an anonymous comment (How would you know what I've done to help?) is clear, and embarrassing. Was that really the best you can do? Were you jumping up and down and wagging your finger as you thought of it? Would you like another try?

My original comment stands. Using such a natural disaster and the deaths of so many people as a lever for partisan point scoring is the worst kind of pseudo-intellectual posturing.

Robert Samet: Okay. Unless you have first hand experience with tsunamis you should not cover the story or encourage people to be generous? And you call this profiting? What a piece of shit you are. Truly a piece of shit.

Buffo: You ask, facetiously, What do you do? You give money, you cheap bastard. Oh, and your post alone proved Paul's hyposthesis.

Bloomsday: No, shame on you! You are the self-centered and elitist one here. You do nothing to aid the relief work and snipe at people who do.

Nikki: Since this is the second time the left has exhibited itself to put politics ahead of charity, they should be doubly ashamed. Charity should be done to relieve the suffering of others less fortunate than us. It's not to make you feel all touchy feely good.

Bravo!

Oh, pardon me, that wasn't a parody?

Just like clockwork, the thin sheen of self-righteousness is washed away to expose a deep, volcanic hatred. I would generalize about the right, like the original post did about the left on the basis of a handful of blogs, but it could just as easily be that someone's off her meds.

oh for goodness' sake. You capitalize on a human tragedy in an utterly shameles fashion, hoping to score a cheap point, while making claims to compassion.

I'd say all it does is substantiate suspicions that you are a petty and puerile lot.

It never ceases to amaze me how much the right wing of the blogosphere can politicize anything. . . . First, Christmas, now this. You've figured us lefties out --- we hate Christmas and support the tsunami.

You know sometimes a tragedy is so horrific that there really is nothing to say other than donate and do what you can. Does everything have to be partisan?

You may want to remember this quote from none other than that great liberal, Jesus Christ: "Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them; for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven." - MATTHEW 6:1

Bloomsday:

(How would you know what I've done to help?)

Because an ego like yours would be telling everybody instead of taking cheap shots at other people.

Using such a natural disaster and the deaths of so many people as a lever for partisan point scoring is the worst kind of pseudo-intellectual posturing.

Well, then maybe you should stop doing it. And your're still a cheap bastard.

Boffo:

Just like clockwork, the thin sheen of self-righteousness is washed away to expose a deep, volcanic hatred.

Hey, it's you BSD people who are so full of hatred you will never give to a charity. Oh, and your prose sucks.

I would generalize about the right, like the original post did about the left on the basis of a handful of blogs, but it could just as easily be that someone's off her meds.

The generalizations are based on the specific examples of people like you. You consider being uncharitable a virtue because of your hate-filled politics. If there was no merit in what is being said, you wouldn't have ran over here and whined about the bad people saying mean things about you. And of course, you don't deny that you are too cheap and selfish to contribute to any relief effort.

"Because an ego like yours would be telling everybody instead of taking cheap shots at other people."

And the narcissism continues.

I'm afraid all this bickering is rather undignified.

Now GET TO BED all of you, before I give you a good spanking.

What a fascinating post. Partisan politics at its best. I have two points:

1) when the "left" (and it's not only the left that's saying this) says that America isn't giving enough for this disaster, when the inaugural celebration itself is costing $40 million dollars, it's not only an attack on BUSH. It's American people saying we think America can do better as a NATION. If Kerry were president and committed a measly $15 million for a disaster that has already claimed so many lives, I as a lefty American would be saying WE CAN DO MORE. It's not a left-right issue. Something like this disaster should be bringing us TOGETHER instead of ripping us apart, as red and blue folks, or purple folks.

2) There really is no logic behind an argument about how many posts deal with the tsunami. And if you even want to look strictly at numbers, several right-leaning blogs' posts on the tsunami deal with how the left is making wrong claims of Bush administration "stinginess". I wouldn't say that is a charitable post on the tsunami. That's USING the tsunami to create partisan politics. AND...that's COMPLETELY belittling the suffering that's going on. By saying that America's donation of now $35 billion isn't stingy, I'd argue that those posts on the tsunami are counterproductive. With over 60,000 dead and 60,000 more to possibly die from the after-effects, can we even comprehend that? Though there are different psychologies of disaster involved in these two situations, this is like FORTY world trade center disasters. More than the number of American casualties in Vietnam (55 or 58,000) have already died. This is our chance to stand out as the wealthiest nation on this planet and pledge more than the initial $35 million.

3) I think a real test of how wonderful we Americans are, both right and left (because we all are w