Heart disease, cancer, etc are part of the plan. Both boring and too close to home. Terrorism and homicide are suitable scary, morally charged, and far enough removed from most people's lives to not have to be mostly abstract fears.
this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
232 points (98.7% liked)
Data is Beautiful
3557 readers
280 users here now
Be respectful
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Isn't this normal for news? The whole dog bites man, man bites dog thing?
Sorry in advance for the political topic, but it's directly related to the info in the OP.
Is the bar for causes of death roughly similar across social classes? As in: are rich/poor people more/less likely to die from certain causes than others? I'm asking because I'm wondering if news coverage isn't a bit closer to "reasons why rich people die" than to "reasons why your typical person dies" there (in USA). Just a hypothesis, mind you.
Not an american but i would think that not many rich people actually get murdered, unfortunately. Private security and someone wealthy is generally more valuable alive than dead if you are looking for ransom or such.
That reminds me, there's this anti-capitalist, anti-war children's film by Satyajit Ray called Goopy Gyne Bagha Byne. In it, there's a song that says that the king is sad and afraid since he has so much money. He tries to cope by punishing others, but it never makes him happy. The only solution offered was to let go of all his riches, and that finally made him happy.
It was for children, so I understand why sadness was used instead of fear. But they do need to be afraid.
As an aside, I think that movie had a decent impact in the communist revolution that happened in my state in the 70-80s. Ray has made some of the greatest movies in the history of cinema, but his children's films still hold a dear place in the hearts of many generations of Bengalis.
Dog bites man is not news. Man bites dog is news.
On the left: shit happens
On the right: humans are doing stupid shit
I think the OP is trying to express that the New York times is distorting the news. Perhaps true, but humans doing stupid shit will always sell a newspaper.
Yeah, I also don't think writing an article every time someone dies from cancer or a heart attack would benefit anyone.
Its really bothering me that 2.1% was listed above 2.2% at the suicide covid bars.
The 2.1 was 2.19 truncated.
The 2.2 was 2.18 rounded.
Actually?
I have no idea, unfortunately
I have a really hard time with drug overdose being it's own thing. That sounds a lot like ignoring the large number of intentional overdoses that happen.
Fucking great visual.
Would be interesting to see it in a stacked bar graph with actual va. represented side by side to give scale to the disproportionism.
It’d be neat to see some other news outlets as well. I’m sure there’s a massive difference.
I doubt it.
NGL.. let's be real here.
Your average New York Joe Blowhole who's 67, obese, diabetic and smoked since he was 15 isn't going to be as newsworthy a story as a murder is, the day he drops dead of a heart attack in his living room.
Outside of the obit a family member puts in the paper, why would the newspapers report on such an everyday death?
Natural causes of death, are ho-hum.
The newspapers report on the things that aren't the run-of-the-mill, occurrences.
True, but/and let’s consider something like a more conservative outlet (relative to NYT) in 2023. Who’s president? What issues are getting talked up pre-election? I’m guessing we’ll see something like drugs and homicide taking a massive chunk of the news relative to what the NYT reported. Even regional news will differ — ever turn on the daytime news in Las Vegas? It’s all car chases and interviews with shooting witnesses. You’d think nothing else happened in the world. Just an interesting experiment.
Oh Yeah, to that, definitely. I always get a chuckle out of the Fox TV stations across the country that will have local horror stories.. Sometimes absolutely lurid in detail.
The reporting vogue seems to be Families Gone Bad in the Upper Midwest..
Why is COVID (2.2%) below Suicide (2.1%) on the graph on the left? Everything else is in decending order of occurance
I've had various family members die from all of the most common things in the top 2/3 of the causes of death. It sucks. But I wouldn't want there to be a story about it in the NY Times about it... because why would they do that?
They're journalists not doctors, treating heart disease and cancer isn't their jobs and it's not all that interesting to write about.
If they reported on heart disease as much as terrorism and homicide you might have things like properly funded healthcare and high quality food regulations, instead you get militarised police.
What the public perceives as a danger is more important than what flashy thing sells.
What about shootings? I don't believe that shootings doesn't make this chart for a second.
Homicides, surely.