People have the mindset that one death is a tragedy but a thousand deaths is a statistic

I'd like to open the debate by stating the contrast between the two separate, diverging thesis's my opponent has offered. The debate title is "People have the mindset that one death is a tragedy but a thousand deaths is a statistic." When my opponent stated that he will reiterate his thesis, he gave a thesis that differed from the original statement that he wished to argue. 1."[P]eople only react to a tragic death when there's a big story about it on the news or wherever, despite the same thing occurring all over the world daily on a vast scale." 2. "I feel as if the majority of people's mindset is set in such a way whereas an event such as a death is only reacted to if it's in black and white in front of people, through the news or media or whatever." These two diverging thesis's leave the debate in a state of obscurity. Nonetheless, I will break down the two thesis's, take on his two hypothetical examples (I assume they are hypothetical because no facts have been put forth), then go to prove people do not have the mindset that one death is a tragedy whereas a thousand deaths is seen as a statistic, whilst backing up my statements with facts. I must also state, that when my opponent states "in front of people, through the news or media or whatever" and "about it on the news or wherever", his tendency to not state anything firmly also digs his statements deeper into ambiguity. Lets begin with the first thesis statement (above, I have put a 1 beside it). This statement is based off my opponents assumption that this is the case, and he has omitted to provide any facts. The term tragic is being used quite loosely. For something to be considered tragic by a group of people, it does not have to of have receive media attention. Take for example the Toronto toddler that died at a day-care (http://www.cbc.ca...). When her body was found lifeless, her family was devastated, the parents picking up their 27 children from the daycare were horrified, and the daycare owners were incredibly upset. This fits the criteria of a tragedy, and a group of people (parents, kids, day car owners) seen this as a tragedy, and that is without media attention, internet coverage, newspaper articles, and even before the police were called. He is talking specifically about people reacting. People, that is, the parents, children, and daycare owners certainly reacted when they saw the toddlers body first hand. The ways they reacted were, panic, displays of copious emotions, calling the police, and then going home or to the hospital. These parents, children, daycare owners, paramedics, and police officers fit the criteria of people, and they certainly reacted to the situation and seen the death of this toddler as a tragedy, and this is first hand experience, not media coverage of any other external source but themselves. Thus, this disproves one of my opponents points that "people only react to a tragic death when there's a big story about it on the news", because in fact, the people I listed Immediately reacted. Secondly, and this applies to both thesis statements, and also fits the theme of "people [do not] have the mindset that one death is a tragedy but a thousand deaths is a statistic.' Take a look at school massacres (such as columbine, conyers, lynwood, etc. etc (http://en.wikipedia.org...). People found these events a major tragedies. I must remind the reader my opponent is taking about a single death with media coverage and "is considered a tragic death despite the same thing happening all over the world", but here, this is an example of death's, more than one (in fact massacres). Presumably, one can postulate that if in the same city a single man was shot by a gun and (still using our example of school massacres) a school was massacred, the story of the single man being shot (who was shot by a shooter that was not involved in the massacre) would be greatly overshadowed by media, internet media, and newspapers, thus proving, that a group of people that were killed would be seen as more of a tragedy than just an individual. More people, such as surviving victims, parents, teachers, and people whom live in different cities who hear about the massacre, would protest and show their condolences for the group of people that were murdered in the school shooting. Similar to what happened in the Columbine case (http://www.cnn.com...). Distinguishing from an tragic death of an individual and the tragic deaths of a group of people, we can see that the group of people who were murdered would be seen as an more tragic event. I would like to discuss my opponents second hypothetical example first (Example 2: A little boy starves to death...). I can say that in this example, specifically stating Africam which has mass amounts of children who have died from starvation - compared with your hypothetical situation with the child and mother - Africa would still be the more prominent in media because it is in fact a real thing, and has been a problem for years upon years, and will continue be in the future. There are a multitude of charities that generate money to give to Africa (such as Aid for Africa http://www.aidforafrica.org...). The problem with starvation in Africa is a topic that is seen as tragic, and thus, sparked charities, celebrity donations (http://www.thisisafrica.me...), and presidential assistance (http://www.usatoday.com...). The child who starved to death may be seen as tragic event, but the case of children starving in Africa is seen as more tragic and thus has generated more attention. Also be aware, you are comparing an individual person with a mass amounts of people and a issue that has been a comprehensive problem that is more tragic in scale. Thirdly, I do see the need in addressing you first hypothetical example because it is solely based on your assumption that has not been solidified by any cited works. I would also like to point out my opponent is unclear in his closing statement. "I'm just saying that in comparison to a story of a single tragic death the reaction is remarkably different; seen as a tragedy. Also when such a story does come along people generally don't think or give acknowledgement to the fact that the same thing is happening worldwide on a vast scale on a daily basis." He is relating his points of view in his closing statement to his hypothetical examples that do not have any facts or cited works to back them up, nor is he clear in what particular story he is addressing. In conclusion, in the midst of obscurity, I have provided evidence and factual examples that prove the opposite of my opponents thesis's, as well as, I have analysed one of his hypothetical examples and proved it otherwise. People do not only see a group of people dying as tragic, but more tragic than just an individuals death.