With the frequent bombardment from the media with pleas for donations towards urgent causes, many people have become familiar with the problems occurring in other parts of their own country and around the world. There are several different ways a person can respond to these kinds of pleas, some of them constructive and helpful to charities, while others are not. This article will look at some of the most common responses and attempt to explain the reasons for each one.
Factors Affecting Your Response
Before looking at the ways a person might respond to the suffering of others, we will first examine some factors that may determine whether they respond to this form of media at all.
Delivery
If you cannot connect with a cause, you are less likely to consider contributing to it. Videos and images of the suffering of others are the most common media through which charitable organisations deliver their message. Although many of us have not experienced the kind of suffering shown first-hand, we can still empathise with it. The more we can empathise and engage with the media presentation, the more likely we are to want to help.
Social Expectations
How we see others respond to suffering can shape our own responses to it. If you live amongst people who make a habit of helping those in need, offering help comes more easily. Conversely, those who are indifferent to media portrayals of suffering are less likely to help. Some of the groups of people who are most likely to donate time and money to a charity include those with higher incomes and people who are part of a religious network that encourages giving.
The Different Responses Towards Media Portrayal of Suffering
A person might feel compelled to take some kind of action after exposure to this type of media, or they may do nothing1. Here are some of the possible responses.
Action Due to Empathy
Pleas for help often attempt to help the audience gain a better understanding of the situation the sufferer is in. A well-crafted narrative helps the audience empathise with those in need. When we learn of another person in a less fortunate situation, many of us may feel pity or sympathy. This emotional understanding alone is often not enough to drive action. It is when we feel compassion that we find a desire to take action.
Although the media need to establish this kind of connection with their audience, empathy and connection do not always result in action, even if it is strongly felt. The reason and consequences of this will be covered next.
Inaction
A lack of action towards portrayals of suffering could be due to indifference. This can happen if a person feels no emotional connection to the story or refrains from thinking about those who are suffering. Some may find the media particularly distressing and, as a way of guarding themselves from the emotional distress, disengage.
If we see too much suffering too often, this can be emotionally exhausting. Organisations know that in order to help people, they need to grab the attention of every possible donor. They also know that the most emotionally impactful stories are the most likely to motivate people to give. Despite being able to empathise with the cause, excessive exposure to this type of media is too much for some and turns them away. It may also result in a person normalising disaster. When suffering becomes normalised, it is easier to brush aside and leaves a person with the idea that there is no hope to fix the problem. This demonstrates that although empathy towards a cause is important, it can negatively influence some people.
People are also less likely to help those whom they feel are uneducated or unable to change their lives, even after receiving help. Imagine donating a lung to a cancer patient who continues to smoke. While some might help, perhaps with the hope that the recipient might change his ways and make a fresh start, others would choose not to. If a person feels the sufferer is unworthy of help and that they will never be able to reap the greatest benefit from the gift they are being given, they are less likely to help them.
Unfortunately, there are also those who derive enjoyment from the suffering of others. As you might expect, these people are unlikely to offer help.
These examples demonstrate that a person can acknowledge the suffering of others but refuse to engage emotionally with it or take any action.
Cynicism
Many of us are familiar with at least a few examples of where the media has portrayed a situation or story dishonestly or bent the truth. The stories told by the media may seem unbelievable to some people and elicit suspicion and distrust instead of a drive to provide help.
Some are concerned that charities do not always provide any sustainable help and act more as band aids for problems. When we know that the help we are providing is providing lasting benefits, it carries greater value.
It is not always clear what the money that is donated will be used for. There have been some highly publicised cases of misuse of funds by some organisations, which have sown mistrust. It is a shame that these few cases have put people off donating, especially since the majority of spending by the charity sector goes directly towards funding charitable activities2.
Seeing Hope Instead of Suffering
Spectating distant suffering can be mentally and emotionally taxing. The Anonymous Project would like you to see beyond the suffering and instead see the hope for a better future that we see. One way to combat the emotional fatigue that comes from seeing suffering is to take action. A single donation can make a big difference to a charity and often leaves the donor feeling better, too. We have several projects aimed at alleviating suffering by building stronger foundations for a better future for communities.
Conclusion
Organisations deliberately portray their causes in ways that elicit strong emotion in the viewer. When we see suffering through the media, this can sometimes lead to feelings of compassion, but it can also be overwhelming for some. Despite the frequent bombardment by this type of media, we should not allow suffering to become normalised, nor should we underestimate the impact a donation can have.
References
1. Åhs JW, Eriksson H, Mazaheri M. Distant suffering: A concept analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2024;151:104672. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104672
2. Myth: Charities spend too much money on overheads. Accessed May 31, 2026. https://www.icaew.com/technical/charity-community/resources/accounting-and-reporting/dispelling-common-myths-about-charities/6-charities-spend-too-much-money-on-overheads