Media Coverage

How do you feel about the media coverage on Hurricane Katrina? Are you satisfied with the media cove

  • Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you think the news media are handling this situation effectively? Do you think they are portraying the situation as true to reality?

Personally, I have been quite surprised (and pleased) at the heart and effectiveness of most of the major TV cable networks. Regardless of whether or not you think a particular network puts a "spin" on their coverage, it seems that every single piece of information coming from this disaster (namely, from New Orleans) has been telling the same story -- they NEED water -- they NEED food. Things in the past 18 hours have finally begun to change, thank goodness!

On the human side, I've seen the tone of many reporters go from slight relief that the brunt of the storm missed New Orleans, to anger that it's taken 4-5 days to get food and water to these folks in the city. Now, it seems that some reporters have been pushed to their breaking point -- they aren't mad anymore, they are just desperate to see help for folks in New Orleans. Shepard Smith, Anderson Cooper, etc, have all shown and expressed the same feelings and emotions that the vast majority of the American public is having. Anger, frustration, and a desire to help these folks. Regardless of whether folks are there because they shouldn't leave, or because they couldn't leave, the desire and desperation for help is incredible. Again, we're all pleased to see food and water finally get to these people. I've been pleased to see anchors finally standing up to many elected officials who keep spewing words that are in direct contrast to every report coming out of the area. Hearing an achor tell a senator that things they are saying are nowhere close to reality is refreshing.

It should also be noted that I'm the only thing I'm a little disappointed about is the fact that, from my experience, only about 10% of all news coverage is going to areas outside New Orleans. Anderson Cooper has been in Waveland, MS, but most of the other coverage has been strictly about New Orleans. The damage has been just as bad (and worse) to the east of New Orleans, though I suppose the number of people in need of "desperate" necessities fewer to the east of New Orleans.

It's also nice to hear from folks like Rita Crosby and Greta Van Sustren (sp?) about how incredible shelter operations in Texas have been going. One reporter has been reporting from a shelter in Baton Rouge, also telling great stories of charity and generosity.

NOTE: Do not turn this into a political thread. Yes, some news coverage is inherently political some could say, but please try to keep discussion more about media coverage and less about politics.
 
I think for the most part it has been good coverage. I saw one segment on CNN Friday that seemed very political in what the anchor and guest said but otherwise it has been good.

I agree there hasnt been as much coverage of Mississippi as I would have liked. I know NO is in dire straits but last reports I heard up to 1000 could have died in Miss. and the level of devistation along the coast is absolutely incredible. Nothing within a 1/2 mile of the coast but slabs. Not even many trees. The images I have seen from Miss. are burned into my head forever.
 
I am now content with the coverage, but in the first few days of the storm, I was extremely displeased. It took CNN a couple days to get out of the "hey, that wasn't so bad, was it" mode. To be honest, I believe that this story was much larger than the nationals could effectively cover, especially given the fact that they didn't preposition a massive number of reporters (i.e., they didn't think it would turn out to be that big of a story.) It was clear by early day two to nearly everyone with their ear to the rail that this was in actuality an unfolding national catastrophe. It took the media more than 48 hours to realize that and report it that way, and I wish that it hadn't.

Today I was extremely pleased with the networks, as they were all asking hard, hard questions of the people who bear the brunt of the responsiblity for making this relief operation run correctly. The media made it very clear that someone was going to be burned at the stake if things didn't get better ASAP, and that the longer they wait the more time they had to stoke up the flames. I've never seen national news anchors cry before until now -- clearly, they understand the magnitude of the story and the importance of getting the information out.
 
It did take the media some time to understand the scope of the disaster but once it was known they have covered all facets well. I would also like to see more coverage outside of New Orleans and Biloxi but many of the other areas are inaccessible. I began to frown a bit at coverage yersterday when some of the focus shifted to political debate including silly discussion on race. I would think the media can get more creative than simply showing the latest loud mouth politico. Maybe a little background on previous floods, near misses, the Galveston cane, history of the levee system, geological setting, etc. There is great demand for these things as people want more background leading to the disaster. The typical what, where, when, why, how.

I have enjoy the coverage on CNBC the best as the station is doing a great job with educating the viewers on the economic impact while still showing all the humanitarian aspects without the excess baggage that MSNBC, CNN, and FOX has recently resorted to.
 
It did take the media some time to understand the scope of the disaster but once it was known they have covered all facets well. I would also like to see more coverage outside of New Orleans and Biloxi but many of the other areas are inaccessible. I began to frown a bit at coverage yersterday when some of the focus shifted to political debate including silly discussion on race. I would think the media can get more creative than simply showing the latest loud mouth politico. Maybe a little background on previous floods, near misses, the Galveston cane, history of the levee system, geological setting, etc. There is great demand for these things as people want more background leading to the disaster. The typical what, where, when, why, how.

I have enjoy the coverage on CNBC the best as the station is doing a great job with educating the viewers on the economic impact while still showing all the humanitarian aspects without the excess baggage that MSNBC, CNN, and FOX has recently resorted to.

I don't mind the media finally challenging the government on it's response, in fact im glad. But your right where is the tropical meteorolgists, talk about previous hurricanes, etc. etc. I think the media has done a pretty good job in this situation because it seems that they may have made a difference by being in the heart of the disaster and showing the devastation which helped wake up the government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top