Sign In
Create Account
I'm sure you've all seen those images on the internet, reminding you how lucky you are that you barely make rent and if you're lucky can afford to live off of Ramen for a month, or those images that supposedly cite morals about how society isn't equal. Well a lot of those images are absolute... BULLSHIT! With that in mind, it's my intent to look at one and break it down and explain why they are nothing but propaganda encouraging you to be content with life and not strive for or want anything more, because; "Hey, it could always be worse."
And today we start with this little nugget I found on my FB feed;
First let us look at the obvious thing about this image; the visuals are an absolute mess, even with the arrows, which yeah, it took me a whilst to even realise that there are guide arrows in there, just make it look visually cluttered, there is far too much going on and it distracts from the over all message, the last line says we're luckier than 3 billion people because we can read it, but I'm willing to bet that at least 2.5 billion of those people can't read it because it's so visually cluttered, be it via colour blindness or some other visual problem which isn't aided by the washed out pallet, all in all it looks ridiculous and on just that alone loses any potential value it has a.... not-motivational poster? I guess that's what it is.
"If you have food in your fridge, clothes on your back, a roof over your head and a place to sleep, you are richer than 75% of the world."
So lets get the obvious out of the way first... where did the statistic come from? If you're making these kinds of claims, then you need to show your statistical evidence, is it conjecture based on a focus group, then in which case what was the criteria for the focus group and where was the study done? How did you verify these results? is it a small sampling from a small third world country, or is it instead from a first world urban environment? Where did you get that statistic?
Also how are they defining riches, is it emotional riches? riches in company? Surely it can't be in terms of physical riches, but it must be... because it mentions physical objects. In which case, if these people are homeless or lack fridges, is this counting aboriginal tribes who don't have traditional garbs or roofs? In which case, who are we to say their lifestyle is poor? It's their way of life and shouldn't be subject to the same conditions we measure ours by because they are so far removed. So then from whence does this arbitrary statistic of 75% of the global populace come from? Well I know where it comes from, it comes from somebodies ass is where it comes from.
"If you have money in the bank, your wallet and spare change, you are among the top 8% of the worlds wealthy."
Ok, so this one is technically true, I'll admit this here, if you have money in the bank you are among the top 8% of the worlds wealthiest people... assuming that money if of a value equivalent to approximately $61,000 USD as established in a 2010 UN study (link to follow). Now then, I certainly don't have anything near $61,000 USD (or £38,850 Sterling), nor do my assets add up to anything close to that. Yet because of the generalised nature of the above comment... well; I have about £130 in my bank, about £20 in my wallet and a spare penny pot, that some how makes me among the worlds top 8% of wealthy people. Hell to be among the worlds top 50% of wealthy people, or the middle class, they estimate an average of $2080 a month income. So apriximately £1600 a month... I certainly don't make that much money, yet just by it's very general nature, this implies I'm just as wealthy as someone in a high end job.
"If you woke up this morning with more health than illness you are more blessed than the million people who will not survive this week."
Sooooo.... now I'm meant to feel guilty because I have a functioning immune system? I'm sorry but this one is potentially the most stupid of them all, there are potentially infinite ways people will die this week and illness is indeed one of them, but what about people who die in constructions accidents, or assaults, or end up contenders for a Darwin Award, what about people who are shot in combat or get struck by lightening? They won't survive the week but certainly not due to a lack of healthy, with this one, I won't deny they have a point, I am luckier then everyone who will die this week, but attempting to make me feel guilty about it because I have a functioning immune system, when in over half those deaths there is a good chance that would be irrelevant is just confusing and makes me angry.
"If you have never experienced the danger of a battle the agony of imprisonment or torture, the horrible pangs of starvation, you are luckier than 500 million people alive and suffering."
Now lets get serious for a minute here, this one is a very valid point and although I'm sure the actual number is no where near 500 million (either more or less I dare not say)... but... this is where the fundamentals of this image's flaws come into play... you've told me what's wrong, now how about telling me what I can to help? It doesn't, instead it makes me feel guilty for not being in that kind of suffering, without offering me a way to ease someone elses... and that is the recurring theme of this image; 'Hey you have this stuff, people don't... feel like shit.' is what it says to me, when it should say; 'Hey you have this stuff, some people don't and really need it, this is how you can help...' and the fact it doesn't do this makes me angry.
"If you can read this, you are more fortunate than 3 billion people who cannot read at all."
I've already made the obvious joke here, but illiteracy is a major problem. You would probably be surprised how many grown adults in your local community can't read, I know it sounds ridiculous, but for a moment, lets ignore the wider global implications and look at this on a local level, 3 billion people who cannot read at all and you'd be surprised how many of them you see every day going about their lives. The biggest barrier for a lot of these people isn't access to courses, but their own pride in not wanting to admit they can't read and that's fine, that's their own hang up they have to deal with. But obviously there are also countries where education just isn't available at any level and as such people can't read or write through no fault of their own, however, those places usually have bigger problems to deal with, like the problem above. Instead the poster just implies that being able to read is a matter of luck as opposed to hard work and education, thusly rendering anything representative as a serious point on this issue moot, what it should read; "You were lucky to get an education there are more than 3 billion people who aren't educated through no fault of their own." THAT! would have made more sense.
All in all this poster just makes me angry, it's factually incorrect, condescending, pulls figures out of its ass and instead of trying to encourage people to help however they can, it instead relies on guilting us for things we may not necessarily have control over. It's message is poor, it's visuals are poor and the whole thing is poorly executed.
Back to top
