US journalism gets tough after Katrina
The news media have been talking about how aggressive and outraged they've become since Hurricane Katrina made itself felt. Reporters suddenly feel at ease sticking it to government officials over their apparently inept handling of the initial response. This, some suggest, is in marked contrast to the quiescent attitude that U.S. journalism has up to nowdisplayed in the face of the current administration. Supposedly, the gloves are now off, and everyone from NBC's Brian Williams and Tim Russert to ABC's Ted Koppel to CNN's Anderson Cooper now feel it's OK to get stuck into the government. Even FOX's Bill O'Reilly has been turning up the heat. Actually, it may well be Anderson Cooper himself (the "boy reporter" who used to work for Channel One and spent two seasons hosting ABC's reality show "The Mole") who showed the way last week when he stopped playing nice guy and verbally attacked Louisiana Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu, in a live interview. Jack Shafer in Slate used Cooper's attack as evidence for the emergence of a news media that, at least for the moment, "have stopped playing the role of wind-swept wet men facing down a big storm to become public advocates for the poor, the displaced, the starving, the dying, and the dead." (Note: The online journal Salon has a highlight reel now available for viewing, that includes Cooper's interview among others (requires free daypass) that shows some of the most prominent examples of media reporters "getting tough.")
Meanwhile, the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, never a friend of this administration at the best of times, has this week gone into overdrive with its satirical evisceration of the government response (see, e.g., recent online video clips such as "Inarguable Failure," "Beleaguered Bush" and "Meet the F**kers," available here). Hard to believe, Stewart in his Monday night show actually praised the TV news media that he so regularly slags off, likening them to an old drunk fat guy in a bar who can "really move" if the occasion demands it.
So what's going on? A Viewpoint piece by BBC correspondent Matt Wells ("Has Katrina saved US media?") posits that "Amidst the horror, American broadcast journalism just might have grown its spine back, thanks to Katrina." Wells goes on:
- National politics reporters and anchors here come largely from the same race and class as the people they are supposed to be holding to account. They live in the same suburbs, go to the same parties, and they are in debt to the same huge business interests. Giant corporations own the networks, and Washington politicians rely on them and their executives to fund their re-election campaigns across the 50 states. It is a perfect recipe for a timid and self-censoring journalistic culture that is no match for the masterfully aggressive spin-surgeons of the Bush administration.
But last week the complacency stopped, and the moral indignation against inadequate government began to flow, from slick anchors who spend most of their time glued to desks in New York and Washington.
So are the news media finally doing their job, returning to the principle of Fourth Estate watchdog journalism, a la Watergate and Woodward and Bernstein? Salon's Eric Boehlert cautions us not to get too excited. He reminds us of the media's early timidity in its coverage of the tragedy,and argues that "The fact that this kind of aggressive questioning of people in power during times of crisis now passes as news itself only highlights just how timid the mainstream press corps has been during the Bush years."
Certainly one reason why the news media have felt strangely emboldened in the past week or so is because there has been some measure of partisan, cross-party agreement that the government was too slow and inept in its response. Conservative commentators have joined the chorus of criticism. Republicans as well as Democrats have been critical of agencies such as FEMA. And Democrats share a good deal of the blame for the current mess. But soon, more than likely, cries of "liberal media bias" will be heard from the right, and it'll be interesting to see whether the news media returns to normal, or whether Katrina marks a real sea change in the way the MSM operate.
posted by hdougie at 9/09/2005 08:48:00 AM
7 Comments:
Like the little kids who ban together to confront the bully at school the media , almost, collectively said, "no more lunch money for you". It's as if the pent up frustration of a few journalists gathered momentum and this wave of was released with unfettered observations and hard questions by them directed towards the administration. As the wave reached its apogee with the added strength of other journalists awkened from their lethargy, good things started to happen. No more easy chances to push off examining what happened by the administration saying they'll be time to point fingers later. FEMA director Brown was removed from the day-to-day running of the disaster's relief effort and replaced with a Vice Admiral from the Coast Gaurd, who from his opening statements, gave us hope that someone was in charge. Lets hope for all of us that this is a sign to come and a bristling press takes again it's place in our society and keep asking hard questions and helps bring back accountability within our goverment.
DJ Smith
With the weeks and months following the September 11th terrorist attacks passing, small tidbits of questioning from the media began to emerge questioning the amount of “blame” or accountability that needed to be placed on the government. The media was slow to begin really asking these questions, no doubt still reeling from the historic events. But as the years have passed, and anniversaries remembered, more and more information has emerged about how possibly the attacks could’ve been “prevented,” or how at the very least we could’ve been more prepared. I feel like I am having de-ja-vu with the onslaught of Hurricane Katrina, and the media calling to our attention sooner to the mismanagement of the relief efforts by our government. We cannot blame our government for the attacks of September 11th, but we can blame them for knowing information and not acting on it. We cannot blame the government for Mother Nature and Hurricane Katrina, but we can blame the government for lack of expediency of relief. I recall the saying “fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me,” maybe it is now time for the government to be accountable for their actions, because I’m afraid to see the state of America after the third time around.
-Emily Benedict
In the days following Katrina the media began to view themselves as a champion for those displaced by first the storm, then our own government. I find it refreshing that the media are taking a hard nose stand and asking questions Americans want to hear. However, I feel that because the media was slow to react as they have Americans should not get their hopes up thinking this is a new trend, instead I feel it is a break in the complacency we have begun to expect, and soon the uproar will die down and we will again find ourselves watching the same bland news shows that report the same stories repeatedly without any real news.
Although I do agree that the devastating events of Hurricane Katrina have helped to revive the media, I am sick and tired of everything being blamed on the politicians time and time again. It is easy for reporters to point the finger at politicians, however I would like to see the reporters live a day in the life of these politicians just to see how hard their jobs really are. The media has said that politicians should have done more to prevent the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina. Politicians along with numerous other people urged the citizens of New Orleans to evacuate. Those who stayed in the city chose to, and although it is a tragedy that they died, they made the decision to risk their life after being advised not to. I think the media should stick to reporting the stories instead of looking for faults in our nation's leaders.
Jeff Beadnell
I think it is refreshing to see the revived spirit of reporters, I just wish it didn't have to stem from this terrible tragedy. Asking important and pressing questions to our goverment leaders is always important, and shouldn't be reserved solely for the aftermath of disasters. The delayed reaction of FEMA and other goverment organizations is embarrassing. The press should make that known and find out the answers to why. That is their job. I don't think they should necessarily be congratulated for doing it. The press have also been bringing up other claims, that politicians should have taken more interest in the predominant poor, African- American population in the affected area. These are things that could have been brought up before Katrina. It is easy to point a finger after the fact. If these reporters are so concerned, where were they before?
- Shannon Cox
I agree fully with Shannon, it is an awful shame that the media needed this kind of tragedy to open their eyes, but it’s about time they stopped being the administration’s puppet. I’m hopeful that this trend in media bluntness continues, because I think it could really benefit our country. I think the media are so blatantly disappointed with our administration because the administration ignored warnings about this disaster and then continued to downplay it once the media shone their light upon it. It was like the media was saying ‘We need help, we’re serious’ and the administration just continued to blow them off. Perhaps they’re resentful that their words did not resonate within the administration as loudly as they should have. I really hope that this change in media’s straightforwardness will continue.
- Tara Thomas
I don't agree with how the media is tearing apart the government for their slow response in responding to hurricane katrina's victims. Nobody could have predicted how horrible the hurricane was going to be. Nobody is to blame, because what was the governement suppose to do...Fill New Orleans with the military? If everytime there was a hurricane, the governemnt sent in troops, so much money would be wasted and then when there is an actual tragedy, we would have less money. I do think that the governemnt could have responded faster, but I have read in other articles that people think the response was slow because of the status of the people in New Orleans. I dont think that race and social class was what prevented the military from responding quicker. I just think they weren't expecting it to be this bad.
Post a Comment
<< Home