२ सप्टेंबर, २००५
"Maybe, because of this hurricane, we got our press corps back."
Said Bill Maher, just now, on his HBO show, finding what he called a "silver lining." He's interviewing Anderson Cooper who displayed some passion and anger about hurricane relief. Maher's theory is that the hurricane experience will cure reporters of what he thinks is their supine acceptance of what Bush tells them about the war. Cooper distances himself from the question.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
६ टिप्पण्या:
I hope the press is fair in finding out all the facts about this disaster.
When heads have cooled, I think the "big mistake" of the disaster will turn out to be the failure to evacuate many of the poorer citzens of New Orleans. I don't think the city ever had any plan to evacuate these citizens. Perhaps they just assumed that everyone would find a way out.
I think the levy issue will be dismissed because 1) the levies would never offer complete protection and 2) I have heard that the levy that broke was actually a new levy.
The delay in relief effort will also be dismissed as being the "big mistake." Although the delay was/is exasperating, it will end up contributing more to emotions and politcal partisanship than the actual death toll. However, this doesn't mean FEMA should be let off the hook for the delay (if there was a delay).
The looting and lawlessness is also more of a sensational story. There have been some deaths and crimes reported. But, it too will have little impact on the final human cost.
I think most of the deaths in this disaster will be from drowning. People getting caught in structures underwater or getting injured while in the water, etc... which would have occurred on the first day of the flood. As such, the only way to prevent these deaths would have been evacuation.
Because you know how much of a free pass George Bush has gotten on the Iraq war. Are we that far removed from Sheehan-a-thon?
Actually, I was kind of impressed by Cooper over this week. At first he struck me as a little over-the-top and bloviating, but it seemed that being down there in the carnage really got to him. It certainly seemed genuine.
The delay in relief effort, honestly, was much smaller than the delay in relief effort for Hurricane Andrew, or Hugo, or any of the other large hurricanes we've seen. Three days is much better than the nine it took for Andrew.
However, the impact of the delay was so much worse because of both the looting and breakdown of order that happened so quickly (note that in Charleston when Hugo hit the police chief immediately applied force and maintained order-- but that wasn't entirely possible here), the fact that so many people didn't (and often couldn't) evacuate, and because geography ensured that almost all the land routes in and out of New Orleans were impassible immediately afterwards, making rescue efforts difficult. A lot more terrible things happened in those three days than in the nine days following Andrew.
Of all of those problems, the delay in evacuation and lack of effort to get those without cars out is the biggest mistake to me, not least because it's the one that could have been most easily prevented.
In response to what Gavin said- I remember during the run-up to the British elections there was a show where each of the main three candidates went before a studio audience and answered questions for thirty minutes. The questions from the audience were your standard stock, and not all that impressive, on the whole. But the host- I want to say his name was David Dimbleby- was absolutely fantastic. None of the candidates on the program were comfortable the entire time they were up there, because Dimbleby had a rejoinder for every question. He was like the ultimate debate teacher, with responses to both sides of the issue.
It fascinated me to say the least, and I can't help but think we'd benefit in America if we had a press corps that could sometimes rise to at least the level of perceived impartiality.
"...I agree with Steven in that I can’t imagine America wouldn’t be better off if the media was more capable of holding public officials of any stripe accountable in the way that Gavin described...."
So you think the press was reasonable for holding Clinton accountable with Monicagate?
Ann, I've read some good stuff on other blogs, and even attempted to throw in some thoughts on my normally unserious blog. But you've captured more of what people are feeling across the board, in my opinion, than anyone else so far. Save Brendan Loy, in his so-terribly prescient writings.
I do have a real comment besides praising your blog, haha.
The press, even if it had done a weak, or biased or whatever job of covering important events, was at least covering most events, or trying to, from 9/11 through the 2004 elections. But in 2005, the return to the rollercoaster of unimportant stories (the missing-white-woman thing, Michael Jackson, etc) was something that smacked right out of July 2001. Or most of the 1990s.
That's the press I'm glad to have back, however temporarily. I can't stress enough how much I separate that statement from the fact that it took this hurricane to do so.
9/11 didn't make me mad. Sad, yes. But there was something about New Yorkers and the response of basically all involved that said, be strong.
Here...even the strong responses are in the midst of ineptitude, spread widely and among all levels and parties. This is tragic, this is tragedy in a far different way.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा