I have spent the last five days in Bangkok, in the comfort of a five-star hotel, and my daily routine involved a two-hour massage and three good meals. Three hours from I was, is Rangoon and Sichuan Province, where many people have died, lost everything they had; or trying to make a difference.

Should I be feeling guilty?

Just before you accuse me of being an indifferent individual, hold on.

Every night, I went to bed while listening to the news updates on either CNN or BBC. Every morning, I ate my breakfast accompanied by IHT, Bangkok Post and South China Morning Post.

I thought, from time to time, if I should cut short my holiday and head to one of the two disaster zones.

But would I be able to make a difference?

For the record, I received a call from an old contact at a NGO wanting to know if I wanted to go to Chengdu for them. I didn’t say no, I just said I was in Bangkok and won’t be back for another few days.

Earlier, a friend from Shanghai had asked if I would go with her. She felt that she had to do something to help. Later, I would read on her blog that she has decided that going to the disaster zone without a concrete plan would just add to the inconvenience of others, and she advised others against just heading west.

I am torn between wanting and not wanting. And let me try to explain why.

Some years ago, I was very active as a volunteer of a NGO in Singapore. I was their photographer for a year and when the Asian tsunami happened, my role was expanded into that a photography coordinator, where I got to decide who went where. It was in this capacity that I witnessed the best and the worst of photographers (and wannabes).

I met young people who insisted that they be dispatched into the “war front” though they wouldn’t even lift a finger to help move a box in our base in Singapore.

I also worked with photographers who went under our organization’s flag but were using our contacts to do magazine assignments they have gotten on the side.

One of the worst cases was a photographer who demanded that I switch an assignment so he could be in a place he wanted.

I had also the displeasure of dealing with schools that sent a whole bus-load of students (with catered lunch boxes no less) to our collection center, only that they were causing more fiasco than anything. And don’t laugh, the school even alerted the media about their participation.

Thinking back, I realized why so many of my worldly friends were less than encouraging when I told them about my NGO links.

Personally, I still want to help in whatever possible, but I am going to be patient about the whole episode. When the hype has died down, when I believe I can contribute positively without feeling that I am just another hawk, I would.

For the time-being, I am satisfied to be an arm-chair media critic, dishing out my opinions on the disaster coverage.

First, I would have to say the The Straits Times, my hometown newspaper, did exceedingly well with China. I was left speechless with the way words and images were used to put across the situation. Although shocking, the front page picture on May 14 (Wednesday), of a man holding the hand of a dead child, says so much for me.

I was looking for letters protesting the use of those images in ST, similar to those I read in the South China Morning Post, but there were none. I don’t assume that nobody in Singapore is unhappy with those gruesome images.

In all fairness, I didn’t think any of the pictures used made me feel as if the papers were trying to boost circulation.

I am, however, more cynical about the way the Chinese leaders are portrayed in the media. Though I applaud the apparent open-ness, I should point out that the open access to the Chinese leaders were mainly restricted to the Chinese press (at least according to the Wall Street Journal).

Instead of being critical about this and just dismiss them as staged photo ops, I rather subscribe to this other thinking: now that the leaders have set themselves such high standard, they are subjected to higher level of scrutiny. At some stage, I am sure someone will ask: were they for real?

I would hate for them to do a Rudolph Guiliani, who so shamelessly touted his role in 911, during his brief presidential bid, only for many who knew the truth to out him.

At least for now, we can be happy that good and important images have been coming out of Sichuan. I personally believe that as long as the rescue work is not finished, the world needs to be reminded, however painfully, there are still people who need help.

After all, can we ever say that the people viewing the shocking images are in more pain than those trapped under the rubble?