During the last year, thousands of people have been killed in Syria by President Bashar al Assad’s forces.

The United Nations was scheduled Thursday to consider a resolution on the violence in Syria. According to a CNN report updated Thursday, a draft of the resolution called on the Syrian government to immediately end human rights violations and attacks against civilians.

The Wall Street Journal reported Ambassador Susan Rice said she was “disgusted” by the actions of China and Russia. President Obama, who has expressed intentions to fully support the Syrian people against the oppressive Assad regime, claims the conflict can be resolved without resorting to military action.

While many of us enjoyed a relaxing Super Bowl Sunday this year, Syria reeled after an attack on Homs that weekend that killed over 200 people. The shelling of Homs by the government entered its thirteenth day Thursday, according to CNN.

Sometimes I cringe at how easy it is to block all of the distant violence out of our minds as we go about our daily lives. I do it all the time. I certainly wasn’t thinking about Syria while I watched Madonna’s halftime show or when I ran my weekend errands. My friend and I got the news about the Security Council vote while in a coffee shop. We were very upset, but we still went out for pizza afterwards, blocking it from our minds for a while.

I notice two things happening here. We have developed an understanding that the further something is in proximity to our daily lives, the less we can supposedly do about it at an individual level—so the less we should pay attention.

We also have become desensitized to violence through media. Sometimes the televised coverage of attacks on Syrian protesters is gruesome, but we do not react in the same way as if we saw something even half that atrocious happen in person.

What does this mean for human rights? In order to make a change to better society and protect the rights of disadvantaged or oppressed groups, the cause has always needed a significant amount of support to get anywhere. The Syrian people still have a large amount of support from the United States (both the government and its citizens) and elsewhere, but it’s not the same kind of focused support as, say, an activist with direct ties to the people or the outcome has.

Nicholas Kristof’s column in the Feb. 5 New York Times talked about the power of online activism and how the web provides tools for change to those whose voices would otherwise not be heard. But I have also heard complaints about how online activism perpetuates this “care for five minutes” mentality. I can go online and sign a petition and feel like I did something to help a cause without taking further action that could make a bigger difference. Is this, coupled with our eroding concerns for distant issues, hurting human rights activism?

I’m not sure I have a decisive answer. I idealistically, and perhaps foolishly, believe that activists still make the world a better place. I also believe that caring for five minutes is better than not caring at all. I also think that if strong focus on specific issues on a higher level than five-minute activism continues to be eroded, the protection of human rights may become more difficult to assure.