It's not that people don't care about such abuses, it's more that news media companies don't know how much they'd care or for how long, so they're going on more immediate stories for fear of losing market share in a news-heavy season.

In the states most people have no context for or investment in anything Norwegian, and in a U.S. national market they have other things they're more beholden to talking about in international affairs because the U.S. is involved or because it's about a more presently thought about place. More than that, it's far enough away that they can report on it later and not really miss out on anything for having done that because there's no race for details or coverage.
If the U.S. participated in the bust, you'd be getting steaming earfuls of it (but then some people here would just say "it's a smokescreen" or "it never happened" anyways).

Run a search for "conditions for newsworthiness" or "news criteria" for more of this sort of thing. And if it sounds and looks like a form of systemic bias, you're right. It's part of why the U.S. is as self-involved as it is--we're enough away from most of the world that it's become a media coverage feedback loop.