Irish Examiner view: Recording your own lack of action
Rescue helicopter 117 assisted in the search operation in Cork on Wednesday.
A person drowned in Cork’s River Lee on Wednesday evening. A life came to an end suddenly, with all that fact entails.
We like to boast in Ireland that our traditions around death — attending funerals, the very notion of a wake, the month’s mind — set us apart; that they show the deep respect we have for those who have left us and the support we offer those left behind.
Those traditions were not seen on the banks of the River Lee last Wednesday.
Some of those present filmed the man drowning in the river rather than going to his aid.
The press of spectators trying to see what was happening eventually meant the gardaĂ had to establish a cordon to hold people back.
Cork Fire Brigade second officer Victor Shine, speaking with the perspective of over four decades of distinguished service, told the : “People today tend to video rather than render aid, but this was another level.
“I would have expected to see lifebuoys in the water and there are some in the area, but I didn’t see any in the water, and I’m not sure if anyone attempted to throw a lifebuoy.
“I would appeal to people not to share these clips and to consider the impact it might have on the man’s family or friends if they saw it.”
Mr Shine’s calm assertion that people will film or record rather than offering help is a devastating indictment of our society, all the more piercing because of the note of acceptance. This is who we are now; this is what we do.
Futile though it may be to say so, those who filmed this incident — and those who share those video clips — should hang their heads in mortification at their lack of empathy for another human being.
It is shameful that people would whip out their cameras rather than make the most basic attempt at helping someone clearly in difficulty in the water.
A life ended on Wednesday night. No one should be proud of themselves for filming that.
We appear to have the semblance of a deal in the Ukraine-Russia war, but what kind of deal exactly?
Yesterday, news broke that the US and Ukraine have come up with an arrangement wherein the US will share future revenues from Ukraine’s mineral reserves under a deal creating a joint investment fund between the countries.
The immediate reaction is that this may be a useful vehicle for the two countries in the medium term, perhaps, but what impact will it have on the war which grinds on and on in Ukraine?
As ever with the Trump administration, the details are slow in emerging, but it was significant that well-placed sources were swift to emphasise that guarantees of future US security assistance were not part of the deal. The same sources stated that such guarantees had been ruled out early on in the negotiations.
Can this deal be positive for Ukraine, then? At the most basic level, it shows that the country can work with US president Donald Trump to reach formal agreements, and it may yet prove a canny move to give the US a financial interest in a peaceful and prosperous Ukraine. That may be significant when and if Russia comes to the negotiating table.
The other way to look at this deal is as an opportunistic move by the US.
A vulnerable nation which has been attacked by an aggressor must now share revenues from its natural resources with a vastly more powerful nation — and all for a form of support which looks less than wholehearted.
It would be disingenuous to think there no quid pro quos in geopolitics. There is an interpretation of this deal which experienced diplomats would immediately recognise: The US has by far the strongest hand in this relationship and would be remiss if it did not extract the maximum advantage.
This deal still looks like one country taking advantage of another country, one struggling to fend off an unprovoked invasion by a totalitarian regime.
Like many traditional media, filmmaking is undergoing something of a crisis at present.
The cinema industry’s challenges are many and varied: The rise of streaming services, increased costs, the technological challenges posed by AI, and more besides.
As a result, when a movie becomes a breakout hit, there is keen interest within the industry in establishing the reasons for its success.
This year the breakout movie appears to be . As of last week, it had broken the $500m (€443m) box office barrier globally, with ticket sales of $291.3m in the US and $273.3m internationally.
The reason for its success is obvious: It’s based on the hugely popular video game , which has sold hundreds of millions of copies. The film, therefore, comes with a ready-made audience, many of them children.
In cinemas, these viewers’ delight in moments such as the delivery of the line “chicken jockey” during the movie has led to uproar, if throwing popcorn at the screen truly qualifies as uproar.
Cineastes may despair at the success of , but its stellar performance at the box office is also being seen as good news for cinema as a whole, evidence that the public has rediscovered its love of the movies.
Or perhaps, much more specifically, its love of movies with chicken jockeys.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
