Because if they don't struggle, you don't have a story...

It's been hit or miss with Telling True Stories for me, but the Ethics chapter was endlessly interesting to me. I kept bouncing from love of narrative journalism to a deep hatred and embarrassment.
I guess I'll start at the beginning. I read a book on cognitive dissonance, and it was all about how memories are mostly wrong a lot of the time. The beginning of the chapter really speaks to that inconsistency, and I think that's really important. I know the book I read talked about a woman who wrote a memoir and then at the end of each chapter had talked over her memories versus her siblings' and her parents' and had conflicting stories from each person. This is so sad but so very important to not only writing, but to life in general.
Second, I feel like my interactions with my profile subject are bordering on unethical because she may not completely understand what I'm doing, and I think I'll show her some of what I have written so far just so she can get an idea and I won't feel so much like I'm misleading her.

Now, on to the crazy stuff. I almost couldn't read about all the stories about following people who are suffering or poor or both and not being able to help. Especially the story about the child trying to get to America and getting beaten and robbed and wandering into the city half-naked and bloodied. I guess I just can't understand that. It's important to have these stories and to tell them so things can get changed, but it takes a special person to be able to witness it without helping. Also, Bill Clinton sent a letter to one of those people, but are policies getting changed? Is there anything long-term happening with these stories, or are a few wealthier people sending aid to these specific cases and then the fad is over? I don't know. And if it's the latter, I don't see the difference between helping the kid as it's happening and waiting until you have a horrible true story to tell and letting other people help them. This gets into the whole point of narrative journalism and its affect on its readers.
I guess I'm a little sceptical because I feel the readers of these stories are probably more upper class and have the resources to send money or clothes to one person and then have their consciences clear. "What?" you're asking "How do you figure?" I don't know, but I don't see a lot of people from my small town reading anything but the Hillsdale Daily News--and they definitely don't have stories showing the hard life of the immigrant trying to make it to America. Thus, their negative opinions aren't changed. And, if these are the majority, then what long term differences are the stories making?
But, I'm wrong. It's much better to have these stories written and even have 5 people read them and tell their friends (I realize the actual readership is much higher than 5) than to have these stories remain absent and people go on thinking their limited thoughts about immigration and poverty.
I just can't get over the idea of watching people struggle just to tell their story.
In the end, I realize how important narrative journalism is to cultural understanding and to change. I think everyone should know I'm always sceptical at first, that's how I work things through. Often, if I start out liking something absolutely, it inevitably falls off its pedestal and I'm crushed with disappointment. So, this is better.