The other day Sharon Stone spilled out her thoughts about China in regards to Tibetan riots and the recent earthquake happened in Sichuan, which has aroused an enormous stir in the world (particularly, resentment in China) and topped the google search for the word "karma".

I still remember the other night when Shania sent me the link to SS's comments in an interview at Cannes Film Festival I didn't really click open. Cuz it takes hell lot of time for my laptop to reopen a web page. So I past.

But then today, I read a piece of news titled Christian Dior's China Earthquake. It turned out that Ms Stone's comment has caused CD to remove all her advertisements in the country and make a statement to clarify its having-nothing-to-do-with-Sharon-Stone-at-this-stage-of-time. The news itself wasn't much of the focus of my interest. What interests me really is the comments made from the readers, which triggers some of my thoughts in mind.

How mindless and foolish of her to ask the question "Is that karma, when you're not nice that the bad things happen to you?" in public like that?

Celebrities are as common as the general public as well. It's just they have way more chances to get on TVs in households and more known to the rest of the population. Of course they can speak out whatever they're thinking. Hey, "Freedom of speech" in the Constitution. But think a bit deeper, should celebrities be more concerned about what they speak in the public than the general population? Should they be more concerned about the ethic issues regarding their all sorts of influences on the public?

I think they should. They are difficult questions. Keeping the fact in mind that celebrities do have a "model" effect on the population, and public views could be easily distorted by those whom they look up to, the answer comes in handy. Somehow it reminds me of the IMC lecture on media ethics. Do the media reflect the society as a mirror, or shape the society with a bit of manipulation? 

The U.S. of A started the Iraq War. Hurricane Katrina.
Tibet. Sichuan earthquake.

There are two interdependent parties involved. One is the central government, the other's the suffered public. Excuse me, but "karma"? So does it mean that what the central government has done, the public would be suffered from that cause as a result? Would Ms. Stone say this to her own country and her own fellows?

Would the psychological reflections towards nation B in nation A's person's mind be carried out in his/her relationship with someone from nation B? Will he/she see that someone possibly in the shadow cast by the country image of B? How many of beings recognise these two different parties?

Being thousands of miles away from the catastrophic areas, I have no means to know what kind of life those people who suffer from the earthquake are having other than reading online newspaper. Looking at the pictures of those innocent children, reading stories of people who tried to save their families' lives. Silence conquers me.

I am very happy for SS that she's friends with Dalai Lama. But I reckon she should have seen the earthquake incident from a more objective and humane perspective.

I reckon most of the comments made to Christian Dior's were from Americans. It's somehow interesting to see the contradicting viewpoints, but some of them did put themselves in others' shoe, in a view that may critise their own country's deeds, e.g. bringing up katrina, even when it was pretty much like revealing their own ugly scars in the public's eyes. This is a bit different from the always-arrogant image of that nation in my mind.