Massive Press Coverage, or not?

[Richard B the EMT]

Looking for opinions to be expressed on the following:

Every time there is a mass evacuation, or large scale disaster, here comes the big names of the electronic media to report on it, and then the President takes a foot tour of the area.

Do you feel the possibly limited resources of the area need all the networks converging on them, depleting them more? Can they not cooperate and go with a "Pool Camera" and reporter? Do we really need a reporter from channels 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 11 on the scene (and that's just the New York City area stations, don't forget the reporters from Chicagoland, Detroit, Los Angeles, Cleveland, Washington DC, Podunk, and East Cupcake)?

Then the President shows up. Due to security concerns, the Secret Service understandably stops everything, so the President (it does not matter which one, they all seem to have done it, and whoever comes in probably will too) can do the quick handshake tour, look concerned, and announce all the money FEMA will be authorized to spend to help the affected people in the disaster area.

Can't the President do his looking from Air Force One, and look concerned, and announce all the money FEMA will be authorized to spend to help the affected people in the disaster area, from an airport a distance away?

Of course, if the president is there, so is the governor, the state legislators, the town council, the Mayor, the chiefs of Police and Fire...Wait a minute, if they're all there, who the heck is minding the store?

[Dustdevil]

Richard, in the immortal words of the Talking Heads (no pun intended), "stop making sense". It just confuses the masses and creates more chaos than it cures.

You have to remember that our society is media driven these days. What is important to the people is whatever the media tells them should be important to them. Therefore, if the media deems something important, than by God, the President had better make an appearance, or else they'll hold it against him as an uncaring SOB come next election. If you don't make that appearance, you're farked. If you do make an appearance, you may still be farked (a la Katrina), but at least you have a shot at redemption.

This is one of the main reasons Iraq has dragged on this long. The media sits in their four-star hotel in the Green Zone in Baghdad, waiting to hear an explosion or gunfire. Then they send some poor Iraqi guy out with a cheap camcorder to get some footage for them. Then the CNN reporter puts on her flack jacket and stands in front of some sandbags, as if she were really in some danger, and reports on the footage of something she never even saw for herself. Consequently, for two years, Baghdad was made out by the media to be the epicentre of violence, when in fact it was Shangri La, compared to the beating we were taking everyday in Anbar Province. But, of course, the media is too scared to come to Anbar Province, so that never got reported. As a result, Rumsfeld takes a few thousand troops from Anbar Province to send to Baghdad, just to make the streets look safer for the news media. Meanwhile, back in Anbar Province, we suffer a record number of casualties over a two year period as a result.

Thanks, CNN, you lying, useless bastards.

[CBEMT]

Can't the President do his looking from Air Force One, and look concerned, and announce all the money FEMA will be authorized to spend to help the affected people in the disaster area, from an airport a distance away?

If he flies over, he gets accused of being insensitive to the suffering on the ground.

He lands, walks around, and gets a feel for the situation, and he gets accused of using people's suffering as a photo op.

Couldn't pay me enough to take that job.

[mrmeaner]

I understand the want for knowledge of major events during a war, but how do media members get enough current information to be dangerous? Are the military posts pushed that hard to cooperate with them that they discuss current strategies and tactics?

Sorry if these are obvious questions. Not a military man.

[firedoc5]

Richard, in the immortal words of the Talking Heads (no pun intended), "stop making sense". It just confuses the masses and creates more chaos than it cures.

Thanks, CNN, you lying, useless bastards.

And don't forget Don Henley, "...they like dirty laundry" They are going to show whatever area looks the worse, whether it's the hardest hit, least resources, last place to receive aid, etc...whatever. Especially if any politician shows up then it's almost like creating a "show" to show how bad it is and how concerned they all are. Even before cameras get there, there are dozens of producers and directors scouting things out, even staging some things. There may have been a situation or an object set up in some way that seems news worthy. It might take them an hour to get cameras there, but things have changed. So they will try and set things back up to look like it did an hour ago.