Today began with what looked like another day of nearly continuous coverage of Pope John Paul II's final hours and death, and of the rituals leading to his funeral Friday. Just prior to the pope's worsening health crisis, news media provided extended coverage of the Terri Schiavo death watch and the political circus that surrounded in.

The intense coverage given these two events makes me wonder, not for the first time, about the priorities of my chosen profession — journalism.

Make no mistake. John Paul's stature as a spiritual and world leader does justify extended looks at his life and his reign as pope. And though the media have increased coverage of other stories today, the heavy coverage will return for the pope's funeral and, most likely, for the first few days of the conclave where his successor will be selected. The right-to-die issue raised by Schiavo's plight brought an important topic to the forefront of public discussion. But what happens when these events pass from the immediacy of the moment to become old news?

I haven't been quite happy over the past decade or so with the lack of attention media have been giving some very important stories in this nation and in the world. I wonder, what if the media took the resources they devoted to the Terri Schiavo case and the pope's death and committed them to educating and informing the public about some of the life-and-death situations existing in the world?

How about nearly continuous coverage for two or three days of the situation in Darfur, Sudan? Such focused attention would help give people a better understanding of situations in the world that urgently need our helping hand rather than a militant sword.

What if there was nearly continuous coverage for two or three days on the problem of poverty in the United States? Such focused attention would help identify some of the domestic problems this nation must face before it can assert any moral message to the world.

What if there was nearly continuous coverage for two or three days on the child sex trade in Thailand, the spread of AIDS in Africa, what conditions are truly like in the rural areas of Afghanistan still controlled by warlords, or deeper explorations of any place where racism, poverty, illiteracy and oppression are dominant themes?

With more knowledgeable of the conditions in which some people are forced to live, more people might be inclined to join in the discussions about and in the efforts to craft solutions that will make the world better. But to give people this kind of news requires a commitment from too many people in the media who spend more time worrying about the bottom line than about the need to inform.

If you want to know why better and more sustained coverage of the ills that plague societies are critically important to the future of the world, consider this: According to a U.N. report released in December, in the two or three minutes you've spent reading this, anywhere from 24 to 36 children in the world have died from malnourishment.