Don't worry, Halliburton & Co will be round soon to clean up the trough, I mean town.

One of these days I'd like to see someone make a typo and accidentally hand over the contract for rebuilding some disaster struck area to Halle Berry.

Having been through my share of hurricanes in the Gulf coast and mid-Atlantic regions, having recently been through the largest evacuation in US history, having recently been a volunteer in aiding victims of Katrina, I can say, with certainty, the worst crimes are the media's continuing distortions of the reality of actual events in order to garner attention and keep the advertising revenues flowing. They are quickly becoming the most innacurate, immoral and irresponsible industry on the planet: massive criminal pollution of the Infosphere.

So, I guess the BBC people spoke too soon.

Yeah, I think so.

From what I saw, the events in NO did actually affect a few members of the American media - but on most it had no effect.

And I have to say, the ones that we're emotionally affected still didn't get it.

I think the worst moment was when Brian Williams was being interviewed by John Stewart on the daily show. Williams expressed his shock that himself, and his daughter got an escort by the police out of the stadium, while people were starving inside. "I couldn't believe that my daughter has more worth somehow, than other Americans"

The fact that a reporter could be soooooo incredibly ignorant about his society speaks volumes. And I hate to say this, but fairly soon after the 'angry reporter' stories broke, we saw a lot of 'I'm an angry reporter posing going on in New Orleans" - it was the thing to do.

The other thing is, as a reporter or politicians, people tend to experience events in totally different ways than most people. All knowledge is transformed very immediately into calculation, into response - this does a lot to dehumanize the experience of something like New Orleans for them. The results are apparent in their long-term information and constant maneouvering for the slightest, and ugliest edge.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Janos,

I have to agree with ED, the media in this country is heavily listing one way or the other, so it's basically pandering to you and your political slant.

Fox, talk radio = Conservative
Major Media, CNN, MSNBC = Liberal

This is much like preaching to the choir, to coin a religious phrase and does nothing to actually educate or inform you beyond what you want to hear.

I blame it all on the marketing and demographics people!!! (sorry Cayce) They compartmentalize use in neat little packages to sell us things, including news....

quote:

The story reminds that the "1st World" is a very thin veneer.

Mmm, its Lord of the Flies with adults to a certain extent.

quote:

So, I guess the BBC people spoke too soon.

These are two different issues. The media's usual bollocks about ordinary people - especially poor or black or both - degenerating into a bestial rabble at the first sign of crisis was simply another run for a well-developed trope fed by the contempt elite groups have for, well, the rest of us, and their abiding belief that the best thing for us is a tight leash. The same mentality informs the media's habitual description of any mass of people moving away from a threat as "panicked". It's also partly sensationalism, of course. In the case of NOLA, to be fair, these horror stories weren't invented whole cloth by the media but came first from people on the ground, including more than usually imaginative panicky white folks.

That idea that Katrina saved the media refers to the sudden appearance of spine amongst journalists who, having seen the humanitarian situation in NOLA first hand, reacted with anger and contempt to the dissembling of officials and, occasionally, their own anchors. I think the BBC report is suggesting that the Katrina fiasco will provide some wriggle room to reporters to start talking sensibly about the corruption and incompetence of the powerful, especially of the Bush administration, much as after Watergate reprters were, for a time, allowed to run stories that would never have been permitted prior to the scandal. Time will tell. The institutional features that bias news reporting to the right - and that includes CNN & MSNBC and the rest, Threefer, I don't know what Pollyanna world you live in - will remain, so this sudden attack of spine will undoubtedly be short-lived.

The Onion Presents FEMA Disaster Survival Tips

I just want to say, as a working journalist, that I have NEVER known the media to be so completely skewed and distorted as they are at present. The "war on terror" and "embedding" of reporters etc is having a catastrophic effect.

Interesting thing -- the Pentagon has unveiled its plans for the next 50 years of warfare, a "God's eye" system of satellites, microwave links etc, that will gives soldiers real-time intelligence on the ground. Who's been contracted to work with the Pentagon on this but Reuters and Dow Jones -- so much for the independence of the media, they are now officially part of the military machine. (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2004/1113internetwar.htm)

I can assure you there ARE reporters who really know what's going on, and are not happy with it, but for various reasons they can never say what they know. There's always some higher interest spinning things. I've just had a really interesting case, though. I sub-edited an interview with a big businessman very recently that was such an ass-kissing exercise that I was physically sick at the end of it. This guy was allowed to trash other people without any questions being asked, or any right to reply. He was accusing named people of having stolen millions from him -- there are people accusing HIM of having stolen BILLIONS, and there were fraud, company law and tax evasion charges against him that were never mentioned.

I told them I was resigning, partly because of the way this interview was handled. I told them it wasn't journalism.

This morning, I see that the businessman in question was assassinated, shot in his car last night. I have no doubt whatsoever that the fact he was allowed by the media to shoot his mouth off and "spin" without being queried, was partly why he was killed.

But there is a little justice in the world.

http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1807658,00.html

My favorite line of the article:
"It appears that it was probably a malicious attempt to kill him and he was in fact killed," Heath told SAFM on Wednesday morning.

Well, independent, objective journalism is practically dead in the mass media, at least in this country. (As I don't know the state of affairs in other countries, I will only talk about the US.) You may get the occasional blip when there is a major event (i.e. Watergate, etc.) but overall, they have a set agenda of making money. Therefore, toe stepping is not going to be high on their list.

The 'elites' in this country, politicians, big media and businessmen are all dancing to the same tune, the money dance. That being the case, true objectivity is a goal that will not be realized to everyone's satisfaction. They will be flashes of brilliance, moments of revelation, but true journalism in the big-time is dead. Carlos has succumbed to it and if I was in that field, I probably would too.

Edited:
I found a neat link related to journalism both mainstream and the weblogs...
http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/

This message has been edited. Last edited by: IamWhatIam,

quote:

My favorite line of the article:
"It appears that it was probably a malicious attempt to kill him and he was in fact killed," Heath told SAFM on Wednesday morning.

I enjoyed that line also. Typical lawyer speak, he must be paid by the word.

Yeah. I was just listening to a radio broadcast featuring that same lawyer (he's actually an ex-judge currently playing a very shady political game). They are now saying that the police are investigating a "botched hijack". An eyewitness who was on the scene long before the police got there was quoted as saying "Whoever did this was seriously pissed off with this guy" and I go with the eyewitness. For now.

Listen: I'm an ex-physicist. There was a moment way back there when I really began to understand "relativity theory". Relativity theory applies to PERCEPTION OF CAUSE. Different observers will see different "causes" for the same effect, depending on their frame of reference. But the EFFECT is the same in each case. Different observers may produce different descriptions of how the effect came to be, but no one is in disagreement about the final effect: the bullet hits the target in each case.

I remember saying to an undergrad colleague: "So physics is really the physics of EFFECTS, not causes" -- he agreed with me, and he's now head of physics at an interesting American university, so don't argue with me, or I'll pull rank.

I was really struck by something Kurt Vonnegut said in "Palm Sunday". He was talking about a writing course he gives. He says something like this to his students: "You will be thrown off this course if you try to explain WHY something happened. All you can say is WHAT happened. You do not know why. You will never know why."

That is kind of my creed as a journalist. It's kept me clean up until now, but to be honest, I really think I'm on my way out of journalism now. I can't play that game any more.

I know this is a thread about New Orleans, and what happened there is very much in my mind. I just want to say, very strongly: there ARE a few of us in the media who (a) know what's going on and (b) are not happy with it. It's all, all, all about money, of course. But there are some of us who cannot be bought.

quote:

That is kind of my creed as a journalist. It's kept me clean up until now, but to be honest, I really think I'm on my way out of journalism now. I can't play that game any more ... I just want to say, very strongly: there ARE a few of us in the media who (a) know what's going on and (b) are not happy with it. It's all, all, all about money, of course. But there are some of us who cannot be bought.

Is it any wonder that it's all about the Benjamins when the only reporters with any sense of integrity keep cutting out of the game?

quote:

All you can say is WHAT happened. You do not know why. You will never know why.

Advice suitable for all walks of life.
Thanks for sharing.

(Maybe I should adapt it for my new sig, though 'Lighters Up' is good too).

I disagree.

There is people who spend years explaining why they did what they did.

And there is a moment to investigate the why of things, if only to avoid better the next shitstorm. But it is not News, it is History.

Although it has as many or more lies than the News.

Of course, it may come from trying to apply the Scientific Method (which is all about hypothesis about the WHY, as the WHAT is known and hopefully beyond discussion) to an information which is at best incomplete and usually of dubious reliability.

But I always aspire to a why. There is always one more hypothesis.

José

quote:

Mmm, its Lord of the Flies with adults to a certain extent.

Yes and no.

"Lord of the Flies" is a book that's widely misunderstood. The children crashed near the deserted island WHILE ESCAPING FROM A NUCLEAR CONFLICT. This is a part of the book which still manages to escape from most critics.

Jack, is obviously a priviliged child and a member of the establishment elite. It's not that the first world has a thin veneer under which lies a more real human instinct towards savagery - it's that to Golding, literally, the first world is populated by Savages.

The 1963 Movie Version emphasizes this through a 5-minute cold war sequence in the beginning, and then some very pomp&circumstance style music as things head towards murder.

I don't believe that an author should be considered an authority on their own work - however - to consider the breakdown of social/government function in New Orleans, for example, to be a 'Lord of the Flies' scenario does point, for me, to a basic problem of ignorance in educated first-world progressives. This was not the intended message for Golding.

That is: in the first-world, every single day for most poor people is war. A war that can't be curtailed into easy divisions of good and evil, or rich and poor, but one that focuses on autonomy, responsibility, and knowledge.

These are the primary factors that create power; and it's abuses - which are also mostly unseen and mis-recognized by those that would advocate for the abused.

On that note, check out some of the indymedia/democracy now reports on conditions in areas of humanitarian aid. Apparently, the aided consider them prisons.

Although I in no way categorically agree with the actions that can lead people to attack rescue workers, possibly helicoperters, the national guard, etc - people who are honestly there to help - given the history, and the day-to-day level of violence in the American South - I don't think anyone should be surprised, or even, uniformly against these actions.

quote:

Originally posted by JRE:
I disagree.

There is people who spend years explaining why they did what they did.

That's EXACTLY why (especially in journalism) it's worth staying away from "why". Otherwise you can go in circles for years.

Wittgenstein said "Explanations come to an end somewhere" -- kinda the same thing. But the guy who said it best was Mullah Nasruddin, the original "mad mullah" and my top role model. The story goes:

"What is fate?" a scholar asks Nasruddin.

"An endless succession of intertwined events, each influencing the other."

"That is hardly a satisfactory answer. I believe in cause and effect."

"Very well," says the Mullah, "look at that." He points to a procession passing in the street.

"That man is being taken to be hanged. Is that because someone gave him a silver piece and enabled him to buy the knife with which he committed the murder; or because someone saw him do it; or because nobody stopped him?"

The thing about a situation like New Orleans: there is so much interference at all levels, like the deliberate precipitation of entire communities into drugs. "They" know that when the shit hits the fan, you're going to have all kinds of junkies on the street. They've created them, and they know who they are, including "sleepers" who are programmed to go berserk in certain situations. Then you get agents provocateurs who deliberately go in and stoke trouble in situations like that, push all the buttons. There are deep interests that want this kind of chaos and division. And I'm not even going to mention electromagnetic influences that can stoke up "rages", raise adrenaline, all kinds of passions. I've researched some of this first-hand, and I have seen and experienced some really, really scary stuff. It's not like they programme your mind directly -- they create dispositions which then skew the behaviour of a certain percent of the population in certain directions. Polarisation of society is a big theme -- "all against all", exacerbating divisions of all kinds. I wish I could tell you what I know about this, but I really can't. The other guy who got it right about the media was old Lao Tsu: "Those who talk don't know, and those who know don't talk".

Just regarding our businessman who got gunned down, it's all turning VERY interesting. The police are now officially investigating a "botched hijack". Reminds me of the Israeli coroner when the army brings in a Palestinian with 11 bullets in his back -- "Worst case of suicide I ever saw". This must be the "most botched" hijack in history, including the bullet holes in the car -- would definitely affect the resale value.

Big questions: why was he on this dark and deserted road late at night, when he was on his way to a meeting that was not on this route? Why did he stop his car at this lonely spot? And the big one: why did he roll down his window, so someone could pump five bullets into him at point blank range?

One of the other papers mentioned that this guy had been involved in diamond dealing, deals that apparently went sour, and put his picture on the front page next to that of an Israeli woman called Hazel Crane, who was gunned down a few years ago in her car not far from where this other incident happened. Hazel Crane was a big illicit diamond dealer, and she was on her way to the murder trial of an Israeli mafioso whom she alleged had killed her husband over a diamond deal that went astray. She was the star witness, but she got killed before she could testify, and that was the end of the trial. This Hazel was big friends with Winnie Mandela, and bought her a luxury house, etc.

The guy who got killed this week was owing millions in tax, but he is now a "patriot" because he was giving millions (including million-rand houses) to ANC politicians. He was alleging all kinds of conspiracies (that was where I got involved, editing the story) saying that factions of the ANC were "out to get him" -- and naming names. And spinning stories. I can just hear someone saying somewhere: "Spin THAT, you little shit."

So, what was he doing on that lonely road late on a cold night with the window rolled down? He's owing literally billions, he's just lost his companies, he's on fraud charges, insider trading charges, tax charges, the whole show is coming around down his ears, and money is suddenly very tight for this tycoon, who is now beginning to really shoot his mouth off as to how he was sabotaged by elements of "the government" who he says were just out to enrich themselves, unlike philanthropic him.

Do you think he could possibly have been doing what any big-time crook does in this town, engage in a little IDB -- illicit diamond buying? I'm prepared to bet you anything that he stopped on that road for a very good reason, to meet someone for a little chat with the window rolled down, and perhaps a parcel passed. You may say that's "why" he stopped, but I say that's "how" they got him.

Old saying: amateur generals talk strategy, professional generals talk logistics.

Nobody said the Why is simple. If it is presented as such, it surely will be an oversimplification, or manipulation, or usually both.

But if you check your own story, it is not a what, but also a good example of why.

QED.

José

Busted. But then, that's why I said "that's exactly why".

Tried to get an early night last night, but my neighbours were partying, so I went to the local pool saloon. There I happened to meet the crime reporter of the other paper, one of the first on that crime scene of evidently malicious intent. There was definitely something very weird about this "dark and lonely" street, he said, off the way, not any place to stop and roll down your window on a cold night, especially when you're late for an appointment.

He said -- I can't stop thinking about the fact it's just 800 metres from where they hit Hazel Crane. I know there's no connection but.

And I said -- I'm telling you there's a connection. She was shot around the corner from her townhouse, and we all know what she was doing. This was a diamond-dealing neighbourhood. That's what he was doing there.

Then we were quiet for a bit. And then I had a double Jack for the road, and now crazy carlos is going to stay quiet for a little while.

I just need to get a quote right back there, from Kurt Vonnegut's "Palm Sunday" (terrific book, very personal). He's talking about his divorce, and then says:

"But I'm beginning to explain, which is a violation of a rule I lay down whenever I teach a class in writing: 'All you can do is tell what happened. You will get thrown out of this course if you are arrogant enough to imagine that you can tell me why it happened. You do not know. You cannot know'."

Although I also kinda like it the way I remembered it.

There are really big shifts happening in the media at present. I'm in a very VERY tricky situation right now, but let's see. "Mandinga". I've got a really good sub-editor friend who knows much more about all this than I do, he's been in the game forever, and then he goes home and puts together music on his computer at home, over which he plays guitar that reminds quite a few of us only of Hendrix, and I don't say that lightly. That's where we really are on the newsdesk. I'm planning to upload a couple of these tunes when I can, so you can see what is really ticking. "Stay Tuned", although I've still got to lie a bit low for a while.

Dream I had a while back: words in a book: "What lies ahead is...." (and then you have to find the corresponding coloured words on the next page): ".... more lies ahead."