This is a silly comparison. We don't follow stories to honor the people whose deaths the story is about. "More people died so you should be more interested in that story than this other one where fewer people died" is just a weird assertion that appears to hinge on some kind of category error. We can just as validly ask, how come all the people who wrote editorials comparing the deaths of the immigrants on the fishing trawler to the one percenters on the submersible didn't spend their time instead reading and writing about the far greater number of people, many of them impoverished or otherwise marginalized, who died of cancer and heart disease that same day? Or about the comparable number who died of miscellaneous routine murder?
I read the fishing trawler coverage. It was quickly obvious what had happened, why it had happened, and whether similar things would likely continue to happen (yes, clearly). What else is one expected to learn or otherwise accomplish by following a news story? But for the missing submersible story it took many days to establish those things. The Titan was, sorry to everyone who laments not being able to dictate my emotional reactions to be more in line with your ideologies, a more interesting story.
I read the fishing trawler coverage. It was quickly obvious what had happened, why it had happened, and whether similar things would likely continue to happen (yes, clearly). What else is one expected to learn or otherwise accomplish by following a news story? But for the missing submersible story it took many days to establish those things. The Titan was, sorry to everyone who laments not being able to dictate my emotional reactions to be more in line with your ideologies, a more interesting story.