[jackflashdrive]

Similar behavior:

- Charasmatic mega-fauna (cute animals) receive the lion's share (so to speak) of "save-the-x" donations, even though a number of other "uglier" species are more threatened or are of much more critical importance.

- Many people spend vast sums to keep themselves and/or their aging parents alive for a few extra (often agonizing) months, despite the fact the money used to draw out a single life in this way could dramatically improve the lives of thousands and thousands of people for generations (e.g., putting a well in an african village).

- People who do not generally condone mistreatment and gratuitous suffering of animals will nevertheless support such activities by purchasing meat that is the product of life-long cost-mandated animal suffering.

I'm sure we could all list much more.

The upshot is that the CNN phenomenon you identify reflects the general human tendency to act 'ethically' on the basis of relations. These relations are influenced by many things that should perhaps have no place in ethics, including similarity, familiarity, and convenience. Despite the manifest ethical/logical shortcomings, our tendencies are probably better than nothing.