Being the first baby of the year is something that the media tell us each January for a while. But today I wake up with the "news" of the first Christmas babies in different hospitals, especially from Latin America.
A curiosity like any other, although I find it hard to understand why it raises so much expectation about it, and I wonder if in the future there will not be "the first baby of Halloween", "the first baby of the summer" or "the first baby of the Easter week"…
I come to understand that when you change the year (an arbitrary date that does not match in different cultures), we are eager for news and with more free time than usual in New Year we like to see news of that style: the first baby of the year, the first roscón de Reyes sold, the first fishing of the year ... Cheerful or in any case "neutral" facts that are a curiosity.
It is an era in which the staff likes to entertain themselves with cheerful topics, leave the misfortunes and the routine where the crisis has much to say and move on to know something different, synonymous with hope perhaps.
What happens with the theme of the first baby of the year (and in the case of the first Christmas baby too) is that we are talking about a birth, an act that should be more or less intimate and it becomes a show.
That each one is free to decide what he wants his birth and immediate postpartum to become, but if at that time intimacy, tranquility and perhaps help from professionals are needed, it is something that mothers and "first babies" go to miss if there are cameras and interviewers hovering.
Because especially if there is television, a staging will be done to make it better, and the staff imagine that it will not be what it is necessary to be in the same way as if there were no one recording to go on TV.
In short, yes, the birth of a baby is a "news" that conveys joy and happiness, but perhaps the way in which some media appropriate that fact is not the most appropriate. And ultimately, I keep wondering, So what if the baby is the first of Christmas?
