My theory is media is biased towards anything that can result in political change.
Shark attacks and lightning strikes are dramatic but they don't seem to bias as much. Rare diseases have the potential to be sensationalist too.
Terrorism almost never makes the news where I live; the closest is assassinations, especially linked to political figures.
If there was a movement against some sugar tycoon, I bet diabetes deaths would suddenly top the news. I'd be interested in how often Tesla accidents are covered by the news.
Media has the follow the money, and for as long as media is paid by advertising, then they have to report on stuff that gets the most salience even if it's proportionally irrelevant.
Cosmetics, fashion, and finance pays well in terms of ads, but that has little to do with homicide and terrorism. There's plenty of other forms of fearmongering like CO poisoning and snake bites.
Media tends to be paid by politics too. Here, nearly every major newspaper has been bought out by political parties. We're seeing the same with digital media, like with Twitter and TikTok recently. It's an efficient way to convert money into social power.
Shark attacks and lightning strikes are dramatic but they don't seem to bias as much. Rare diseases have the potential to be sensationalist too.
Terrorism almost never makes the news where I live; the closest is assassinations, especially linked to political figures.
If there was a movement against some sugar tycoon, I bet diabetes deaths would suddenly top the news. I'd be interested in how often Tesla accidents are covered by the news.