Jeff Goldstein takes on those suggesting it is absolutely necessary to photograph and pass around pictures of the dead in order to somehow speak ‘truth to power’ about the ‘government failures’ in New Orleans.
Go flame him for a while.
Reader Interactions
160Comments
Comments are closed.
ppGaz
I have no desire to read or flame him, but I’m wondering why in the world anyone thinks that we are all children and need a “rule” to handle this situation. Where were the corpse-photo police after the tsunami?
Isn’t it acceptable to let the photogrpahers do what they do, let the outlets decide what to publish, and let the public decide what to view, and what to think about it?
Oh …. that would be a “free society.” Sorry, my bad!
Manish
Its also not absolutely necessary to watch SouthPark, own an “assault weapon”, or a million other things. Nor is it necessary to have reporters embedded with the military, nor is it necessary for the whitehouse to have daily briefings with reporters.
Except all of those things are necessary in the United States.
jg
Hiding the facts and putting a happy face on the situation. Thats our leadership now. Try to get to the bottom of who’s responsible and you’re playing the blame game. Thats our leadership now.
Throughout the 90’s I’d receive emails from some coworkers, the kind of people who think they have proof that taxes are unconstitutional, conspiracy emails that are now covered by conspiracy websites. Anyway, one time I got an email warning me about the dangers of FEMA. It listed the things FEMA was empowered to do in an emergency. It basically painted them as part of the black helicopter, one world government UN takeover crap. Bush took FEMA and turned them into a powerless line item in the DHS. A place that can be staffed and run by nobodys who helped your last campaign. People who will have NO IDEA what to do in an emergency. It went from an organization that would immediately recognize that LA can’t handle this disaster and step in, to a group that says it needs to wait for a call for help and is incompetent anyway. Thats our leadership now. This is what happens when you elect a group that doesn’t think the federal government should have any real power. And now it doesn’t.
chadwig
Thanks for the link. The weakness of his arguement reflects your own. Show the corpses. Show them from Iraq. Show them from NOLA. There should be a political price to pay for this kind of epic mismanagement, regardless of party. Were those corpses still breathing, I’m sure they would want accountability.
DougJ
Don’t usually agree with the kossacks or whatever Colie calls them, but they’ve got this right
DougJ
I really liked his acting in Jurassic park, so I’m not going to go flame Jeff Goldstein.
Anderson
I would think the media would blur out the faces of the dead, like in the Abu Ghraib photos.
Besides, this is a red herring: preventing PHOTOS of the dead is not an excuse to FORBID ANY MEDIA WHATSOEVER to enter, which is what they’re actually trying to do.
Andrei
If you’re point is that photographs should not be taken, then you are with all due respect, wrong. Goldstein makes a lot of logical leaps that are a bit crass, and both of you need to get over the partisan aspect of the issue and realize that disaster after natural disaster is documented by whatever technological means we as humans have available.
I guess next we should force Christians to stop hanging crucifixes on their walls with a Jesus nailed to it, because its just a bit too gruesome and exploitative to handle, right? Besides, it obvioust that Christians are really just just using that image of Christ on a cross to prove to others just how fucked up and wrong pagan govenrments like the Romans were.
Like I said, I think you are entirely wrong on this issue. I’ve yet to hear to rebuttal to my earlier point, and what I think is ppGaz’s legitimate point in this thread.
norbizness
Then jump on the cheap political points of people who want to use photographs to score cheap political points, not the people who want to take photographs. I mean, is that really the argument?
Or; how about the federal government not act like a bunch of secretive, PR-management-obsessed lunatics, and there will be no power to which truth would be spoken?
Mike S
I think it is going to be very interesting to see how many tunes change if/when Hillary is President and she does half of the things that Bush has done as far as secrecy goes.
I don’t think enough people on the right think about the precidents that are being set by Bush.
demimondian
You know, I’m torn. I don’t want to see pictures of identifiable corpses floating in the water, which is what I assume the FEMA order was meant to cover. That would be wrong. But I also don’t want the news media in New Orleans to not take pictures of important things if corpses happen to be in the way. Perhaps some clarification would make sense.
guyermo
DougJ, that actor was Jeff Goldblum, not Goldstien. But it’s also probable that i misread a snarky comment.
ppGaz
Again, I am made to spit Coke Zero upon my keyboard …..
Defense Guy
Forget the politics for a second. If it was your family member in the picture, would you want to find our about his/her demise through the media?
Vladi G
Glad to see John agrees that we need to the government to hold our hands on this kind of stuff. ppGaz is right. Where are all you free market, limited regulation Republicans on this one?
If every media outlet in the country made conscious decisions not to show, or even to refrain from taking, these pictures, I don’t think very many on the left would care. But why do we need the government telling them what to do? Can you answer that, John?
Vladi G
If it was my family member, I’d probably already be pretty sure of their demise. Considering the hurricane was well over a week ago, I’m not sure I’d be able to tell it was a family member.
I certainly wouldn’t need the government to protect me from that information.
DJAnyReason
While I’m sympathetic to the administration’s stated rationale, frankly its unconstitutional. If the pentagon papers could be published, then the media ought to be able to photograph the corpses of victims of Katrina. And if they’re overly crass about it… well, isn’t that why Dave loses the ratings war to Jay, even though he’s funnier?
If something doesn’t offend you, than you’re not living in a free society.
Narvy
I actually thought this when I was a kid. Mel Gibson has fixed that.
I see this as a very difficult issue. It’s despicable to use such photographs as a political club to bludgeon one’s opponents. It’s despicable to deny the creation of the historical record. It’s despicable to withhold true images of devastation from the public. It’s despicable to publish such images as sensationalist hype to boost readership/viewership.
This is a moral and ethical balancing act (sorry, all you absolutists out there). I don’t know what is the right thing to do. I do know that no matter which side prevails, the other side will be outraged and misuse the result for their own ends. We as a society have to choose, and we can’t reach a consensus. I would appreciate hearing any thoughtful arguments (NOT UNSUPPORTED OPINIONS), including religious arguments believe it or not, on either side.
Scarpy
I wish I could be as optimistic as you, demi, that the no-photo order is only about respecting the dead (though even if that were the case, I still would think it was wrongheaded). But more and more info keeps coming out showing that FEMA’s leadership are all Bush campaign vets, a lot of them from the media relations side of it. And so I can’t help thinking there’s a political ulterior motive involved.
Either way, though, this BS about troops pointing guns at journalists and reporters being blocked completely from the city is flat-out wrong. This is America, and the government doesn’t get to decide what is “appropriate” for coverage. No dead deserve that much respect.
Steve
The First Amendment doesn’t have a “bad taste” exception. That doesn’t preclude you from accusing the media of bad taste, but it should preclude the government from telling the media where it can and can’t go on the grounds of bad taste.
Narvy
I thought he meant as the Tyranasaurus.
Clever
Source: NY Times
Do with that what you will.
Narvy
Red herring. It’s not likely that a dead body at this stage would be identifiable from a press photograph.
Andrei
It has become quite clear that DougJ was actually a disguise for a liberal-leaning person who was doing a spot on caricature of a rigt-leaning wingnut. His transformation in the last month shows someone who is much smmarter than the ID backer we all saw a month ago robotically repeating GOP partisan talking points. I can only assume that once Katrina hit, whoever sits behind the keyboard of DougJ realized their spoof was probably not going to play well in good taste and they made adjustments accordingly.
How do I know this? I know of no person who is able to make the kind of blind, uninformed statements DougJ was making prior to Hurricane Katrina, then pull off a whopper of a Hollywood movie actor reference with the Goldblum/Goldstein snark. Just not possible. Jeff Goldblum is not that well known an actor to cite by name for 99.99% of the people in this country, unless they follow the Holywood liberal elite.
Kind of shame really… I miss some of the more absurd things DougJ was saying a month or so ago.
Pb
8/29/2005: Never Forget.
Narvy
But well known to the other .01% like us. Not even “probably” not that well known. I’m curious to know where you got this statistic.
Davebo
Wow. If I hadn’t read that link I’d never have known Sullivan has a bear fetish.
But other than that it was pretty freakin useless.
docG
Ah, yes. Thank God we didn’t have to be subjected to any pictures of the rubble of the Twin Towers to underscore any agendas. President Bush, standing on the rubble with the bullhorn, over the top of many pulverized bodies, that photograph surely wasn’t intended to imply strong leadership, now was it?
I respect John Cole’s thinking a great deal, but this one has got me. If you use a technique to strengthen your ox, there is not room to bitch when said ox is gored by the same technique.
John Cole
You are just figuring this out?
And I thought I aked you guys to go flame HIM?
Defense Guy
Yeah, which bodies did we see in the rubble of the towers again? And it’s not a red herring, that is usually the reason given even by the press for not showing the bodies.
ppGaz
No, but he won’t cop to it. I’ve asked him to email me (to be sure that he isn’t, say, you) and you can send him my email address for that purpose. I realize that you are not a secretary, but I know of no other way to get him my addy without publishing it here, which I’m askeered to do.
norbizness
Sorry, John, that post is what’s called “an attractive nuisance” in the world of torts.
jg
This isn’t about showing bodies, thats just a distraction. Typical Rove tactic.
This is about locking down NO and not letting journalist view the destruction and then tell us about it. They can’t control the message if they have a bunch of reporters running around reporting on things. Reprters already fucked up their new interrogation techniques. They simply don’t trust the press to remain on message. Stupid first amendment, always getting in the way of good government.
Defense Guy
The press has been in NO showing pictures since even before the storm started. So, where is the issue?
capelza
I do have to say that the idea that any family memeber will recognise a body that has been floating in water for any amount of time, especially over a week in hot, fetid water IS a red herring. And yes, I do know personally about dead bodies in water.
The photographic record should be taken. If someone abuses it for political reasons (obviously the opinion of what constitues that will vary wildly) they should be taken to task. Like the video of the beheading of Nick Berg that flew through the web. I thought that was horrible. But it is part of this tragic, terrible event.
ppGaz
From Alterman; I thought it was just too good to pass up.
Davebo
It’s more than just about taking pictures of the dead.
An interesting dynamic is taking shape in this city, not altogether positive: after days of rampant lawlessness (making for what I think most would agree was an impossible job for the New Orleans Police Department during those first few crucial days of rising water, pitch-black nights and looting of stores) the city has now reached a near-saturation level of military and law enforcement. In the areas we visited, the red berets of the 82nd Airborne are visible on just about every block. National Guard soldiers are ubiquitous. At one fire scene, I counted law enforcement personnel (who I presume were on hand to guarantee the safety of the firefighters) from four separate jurisdictions, as far away as Connecticut and Illinois. And tempers are getting hot. While we were attempting to take pictures of the National Guard (a unit from Oklahoma) taking up positions outside a Brooks Brothers on the edge of the Quarter, the sergeant ordered us to the other side of the boulevard. The short version is: there won’t be any pictures of this particular group of Guard soldiers on our newscast tonight. Rules (or I suspect in this case an order on a whim) like those do not HELP the palpable feeling that this area is somehow separate from the United States.
At that same fire scene, a police officer from out of town raised the muzzle of her weapon and aimed it at members of the media… obvious members of the media… armed only with notepads. Her actions (apparently because she thought reporters were encroaching on the scene) were over the top and she was told. There are automatic weapons and shotguns everywhere you look. It’s a stance that perhaps would have been appropriate during the open lawlessness that has long since ended on most of these streets. Someone else points out on television as I post this: the fact that the National Guard now bars entry (by journalists) to the very places where people last week were barred from LEAVING (The Convention Center and Superdome) is a kind of perverse and perfectly backward postscript to this awful chapter in American history.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8045532/#050907c
Jay
Were those corpses still breathing, I’m sure they would want accountability.
Accountability? Who from? God? Mother Nature? Mother Earth? Buddha? I mean, we are talking about a natural disaster, right? One that packed winds of 145MPH along with torrents of rain. I don’t suppose you’ve managed to put a thought in your head that the majority of these deaths where caused by a HURRICANE.
slide
Nobody wants to see that.. even the horrible evil left, but you are very naive to think that is what FEMA was concerned about. This is about sanitizing anything that reflects poorly on the adminstration. Just like the flag draped coffins from Iraq.
Freedoms are always taken away with reasonable arguments. Its “reasonable” to not want to see gruesome corpses. Its reasonable to not want to invade the privacy of the deceased family.
Its reasonable to say that releasing the photos of the governments abuses at Abu Garib may inflame our enemy and cost lives.
Its reasonable to say that releasing Robert’s memos while he was a government employee to another goverment employee would violate attorney / client privledge. (even if the client is the american public)
Its reasonable to say that we shouldn’t release the memos of Boulton, a government employee, to another goverment employee, because… well.. it would violate their private talks even though both parties are theoretically working for us citizens.
Its reasonable for the federal government to check out what you are reading in a public library without judical review because they are protecting us from terror you know.
Freedoms are taken away not with guns.. but with reasoned arguments.
Wake up America. Wake up.
jg
No one is talking about the HURRICANE!!! Its about the preparedness for the hurricane and the response after the hurricane. Will you fucking people please stop making up shit to deflect the issue?
ppGaz
Mmm, a little like saying that a plane crash was caused by gravity.
It’s my opinion that this particular disaster presented a unique opportunity (because it had been studied, modeled, predicted and simulated by a variety of authorities) to prevent death and protect citizens. It remains to be seen whether those things were done to a degree that the citizens find acceptable.
Let’s examine the record and the wreckage, and see how many deaths were just caused by a hurricane, and how many were caused by the failure of systems and institutions.
Yes, we are all wondering what the “root cause” of the problem might be. I think plan BN is “Blame it on the Bossa Nova.”
Mike S
You would think that all of the straw would have been blown away by the HURRICANE.
Jay
Will you fucking people please stop making up shit to deflect the issue?
I’m not making things up. Chadwig obviously believe somebody is to blame for all the deaths. He must believe that, otherwise he wouldn’t be talking about corpses wanting “accountability.”
What if some of the dead are those who didn’t leave? Not those who couldn’t leave, but those who refused to leave, even if they could. Should somebody be accountable for their deaths?
Is he including in his “accountability” the near criminal lack of preparedness on the part of LOCAL and STATE officials? Or this still another “Bush Bashing” moment?
slide
Another tactic used is the false choice. Think of the Amendment to prevent burning the flag. If you oppose it, on constitutional grounds, you are portrayed as someone that supports burning the flag. Paints the opponents into a very undesireable corner. Repubs are good at that sort of thing.
same here. You are against the restraints that FEMA would love to place on photographing bodies.. well then you are all for showing bloated bodies on the 6pm news to gin up polital points. Not a very defensible position either. Cole did this with his satirical letter (that many on here actually thought to be true) about why the left WANTS to have these gruesome photos taken and shown. A true conservative would be appalled that some political hack as some federal agency is telling the press what they can or can not show the American public about a natural disaster. Think of it folks. Just think of it. Remember whatever precedents you want to set here about press freedoms will be in place with the next president.. He/she may be a flaming liberal. Do you want the president to have the power to dictate what the press can tell you? I think not.
Narvy
I have just three words for you: Eff See See.
Mike S
I am. Are you including Bush and the Federal agencies in your calls for accountability?
Jay
Mmm, a little like saying that a plane crash was caused by gravity.
Mmm. Last time I checked plane crashes weren’t natural disasters.
Next time there’s a huge earthquake in California make sure all of you are there to demand accountability.
Narvy
I never speculate on the wishes of dead people. It consumes time and energy and produces only wasted bandwidth.
jg
Yes. Everyone knows the locals screwed up but only some of us realize that the disaster was way beyond the capabilities of the state or city. Even a rich city or state culdn’t be expected to handle a city being destroyed. Its a country issue when we lose a city. Instead of staying on vacation Bush should’ve gone back to work and got the federal government moving.
Mike S
Been there, and the response was great. And that was with out any warning.
Narvy
Yeah, leave that to the celibate people.
This is beginning to sound like the “Just Curious” thread, only less amusing.
jg
My God did you ever miss the point of PPG’s statement. You did a great job of turning it around as an attack though. Very well trained you are.
If Bush stays on vacation when San Fran is lost I’ll demand accountability. You think I’m wrong to wonder why he doesn’t go back to work?
Mike S
BTW. FEMA had an office set up in my city within 4 days after the earthquake in 94. Who was President then?
Vladi G
Ah, John Cole has taught you well. Deaths have one cause, and one cause only. The government has absolutely no obligation to protect its citizens, and is therefore cannot be responsible for abdicating such a responsibility. You learn quickly, young one.
Stormy70
I can understand not letting the press into the Superdome area and the convention center, if they are being investigated by a crime scene unit. I read that they have found bodies in a freezer, who appear to be victims of crimes. I would hope that there is someone who is investigating possible crimes committed in these areas. I hope they would be smart enough to keep the press out of there if it is an active crime scene.
I think showing the dead bodies is hurtful to the victims families.
Trent
So out of curiosity, for the Bush defenders in this thread: What is your end game? I mean, in your mind, based on your ideals and principles and everything you’re fighting for, what kind of country are you striving to have in, say, 10 years?
Describe your ideal America in 10 years that would make you sit back, breath a sigh of relief and say, “A job well done. Now i am happy.”
And incorporate how you see Bush fulfilling your ideal.
Andrei
Uhhh… Actually… I mentioned this possibility about three weeks or so ago in a different coment thread during the ID “debate.”. Just reiterating the point. Sheesh.
Vladi G
Wow. This response is beyond words stupid. But then again, what should we expect from someone who can’t even get anyone to agree with him on his own damn blog.
Andrei
Uhh… Obviously I made it up. It was hyperbole.
ppGaz
That’s called a “whoosh.”
Vladi G
I think only the vitcim’s families know whether it’s hurtful, regardless, that completely misses the point. I think that’s not my decision, nor the government’s decision, to make for the rest of the populace. I think forbidding the press from covering pretty much anything not related to sensitive matters of national security is hurtful to the first amendment.
Steve
It’s pretty clear the “respect” line is a colorful phrase dreamed up to try to deflect criticism for this partisan action. This is standard operating procedure for the Republicans these days. Claiming showing pictures of troops coming home from Iraq is disrespectful, when really it’s just about controlling the emotional bad news, etc.
Another article parroting this tripe isn’t going to convince anyone.
DougJ
Andserson Williams, er Colie — you’re doing a heck of a job
Jay
Wow. This response is beyond words stupid.
Uh, no retard. PP’s comparison made absolutely no sense. Tell him to try and come with something reasonable.
But then again, what should we expect from someone who can’t even get anyone to agree with him on his own damn blog
Unfortunately, I have a small readership comprised of a lot of foolish liberals. Like you.
jg
Tp paraphrase Nancy pelosi:
Jay, if you want to make a case for the White House you should go on their payroll.
Mike S
You never answered, Jay.
Mike S
Sorry, wrong post. You never answered this question Jay.
Another Jeff
“But then again, what should we expect from someone who can’t even get anyone to agree with him onh his own damn blog.”
I’m sure that’s a hard a hard concept for those of you used to left-wing echo chambers, where anyone disagreeing is immediately banned.
BTW, I clicked on your link. Congratulations on that big win over Rutgers on Saturday. The Ron Zook era of Illini football will soon have everyone forgetting those Bud Wilkinson Oklahoma teams.
Jay
Are you including Bush and the Federal agencies in your calls for accountability?
Of course. I’ve been specific.
1. Fire Michael Brown. He should have been fired after it was learned FEMA was giving checks to people in Florida for hurricane relief when their houses weren’t even damaged.
2. It’s clear that a good portion of the foul-ups from the feds had nothing to do with people “not doing anything” but rather the typical ridiculous ass red tape that one can expect to work with when dealing with the federal government. This kind of thing should have been indentified last year in Florida when the response was much better (mostly because state and local officials did a good job beforehand), but still slow at times due to bureaucratic foul-ups.
But to be honest, the brunt of the blame for all of this falls on the state and local officials. I know Bush haters don’t want to hear that, but it’s true. The city had a plan in place and it was not followed. Governor Blanco waited too long to make decisions that delayed actions to be taken by others by days. There’s no excuse for their screw-ups. problem is, aside from Brad DeLong, I have yet to see a prominent liberal blogger go after Nagin and Blanco.
Shit, go read Willi’s blog. NOT A SINGLE WORD about them. It’s all Bush and the GOP.
ppGaz
Of course it did. Most people here got it.
Your original statement was absurd on its face, and I simply highlighted that for the amusement of the crowd. Not expecting you to get it, of course.
The deaths were “caused by a hurricane.”
How fucking profound! Hey, I can do better than that:
The deaths were caused by low barometric pressure.
No, many of these deaths were caused by people who failed to act or react appropriately to a hurricane, which is the point — no matter your point of view — of about 93.7% of the material on this blog lately.
And whether you see it or not — an you won’t — some of those people are going to be held accountable, whether they like it or not.
I can name three who need to go on to other opportunities right now: Nagin, Blanco, and Brown. Adios, you incompetant idiots.
Narvy
John, we need an HTML hyperbole tag. And while we’re at it, could I have sarcasm tag?
RSA
I think that this is an interesting question in itself, which if someone doesn’t look at is not likely to be answered. That is, some people were killed by the hurricane and its direct effects, by drowning, by blunt force trauma, etc. Other people died while waiting for help. It would be very good to find out that almost every death happened very early on. It would be very bad otherwise. From a certain political perspective, it might be best not to find out at all. (This is pure conspiracy theorizing at this point, of course. Who knows how FEMA’s internal decisions are made.)
Narvy
Earlier in this thread I posted the thought that this was moral and ethical dilemma. (To forestall the deflection critics, yes, I know I didn’t use the word dilemma in the posting). Nobody has commented on it. Am I the only one here who thinks this a difficult issue without an easy Right v. Wrong resolution?
pmm
Mike S wrote:
I’m just glad that someone has introduced a frame of reference as to whether FEMA was ‘late’, ‘early’, or ‘on time.’ There are differences between an earthquake and a hurricane/flood, of course, but I’ve been bothered by the idea that everyone was slow without many folks discussing what should’ve been the standard…or rather, without there much precedent cited for what should’ve been the standard.
Four days in the case Mike S cited seems kind of long, to me. For Katrina, if you start the clock on Monday afternoon, that still puts you in on Thursday, at which point folks were already p*ssed…
Mike S
I read Oliver’s blog maybe once a month. But let’s see what the dreaded and evil Markos has to say.
And I did not see anyone disagree with him in a 137 comment thread. Obviously there are some fools who only care about the partisan consequences, but I and many like me want an accountable government.
Look at the “investigations” being talked about in congress. A “bipartisan” one where the dems weren’t even told about it until after Denny and Billy were announcing it.
This was a major f’up at all levels of government. One that cost lives. The only people I see that seem to be in cover mode are the elected Republicans.
jg
Katrina came with a big fat 3 day warning. Earthquakes tend to show up all of a suddden. For Katrina they should have started the clock on friday BEFORE the hurricane made landfall.
Defense Guy
Unfortunately the Hurricane was followed by a flood. So we are really talking about 2 seperate natural disasters all rolled into one. I think the floods will end up being the cause of more deaths than the actual storm.
Mike S
That was putting an actual office in the city of Santa Monica, a city that was hit harder than the news ever showed. There were feds on the ground much quicker than that.
And remember that an eq gives no warning. One minute I was dead asleep and the next I was literally flying across the room. My feet didn’t touch the ground until I grabbed the doorway. Not the best way to be woken up at 3:00ish AM.
Defense Guy
Mike S
How long did it last? The differance in this case is that the water is STILL in the city. The disaster is still ongoing.
Mike S
I’ve liked that one a lot. Most hurricanes don’t include rain/floods. No one could have anticipated that this one would.
Mike S
The quake itself? 31 seconds. The buildings collapsing? a day or two. Infrastructure? The I/10 took about 4 months around the clock to repair.
Defense Guy
Mike S
Come now man. This is a special case and you know it. There was no where for the water to go due to the special circumstances of the city of NO. The floods don’t stick around this long in Florida do they?
Defense Guy
The storm was over well before the levees broke and the floods began.
tBone
I don’t think that it’s
I do think it’s important to have a historical record, and I think photographers should be allowed in. If any of those photos were to be used for partisan purposes, then the people doing it should be roundly scorned.
On a more practical level, being open about the process would help silence the tin-foil crowd.
Narvy
True. But a lot of people were acutely aware of the risk that any one could.
Mike S
Which is why they have special plans for N/O and practiced them for years.
tBone
Forgot to stick this in the last post. ppGaz, I have to ask:
Are you intentionally misspelling incompetent to tweak John? Not that I can imagine anyone doing such a thing on this blog . . .
jg
A flood that was predictable and therefore cannot be used as an excuse for holding up the disaster efforts.
I work in tech. I implement new software to our production environment all the time. Trust me that I cannot go into production without a plan that encompasses event the most remote possibilities of failure. Its called contingency. Even if it is not likely to happen I have to show how I would handle it. And this is for non critical reporting software. For a hurricane hitting New Orleans its wrong to bitch that they were surprised by a flood.
Defense Guy
But it does make it a different situation than most Hurricanes and certainly different from an earthquake. So comparing the 2 is apples and oranges.
Defense Guy
Yep jg this is exactly like a software product rollout. Hell, you should be in charge.
RSA
Here’s a direct analogy: If an airplane crashes, is it right or wrong for photographers to take pictures of the victims? To me it’s clear that right and wrong don’t apply to taking the pictures, but rather to publishing them with a lack of respect for the dead and those who survive them. FEMA seems to be saying that the human decency of news organizations is not to be trusted, so they’re trying to preempt them by stopping the information at the source.
I’d say that in some cases it would be wrong to publish unaltered pictures of the dead, but the morality of trying to prevent people from taking pictures because the pictures might be misused is questionable at best.
jg
This is New Orleans. A hurricane is more likely to cause flooding in NO than most places therefore you PLAN for it. You don’t use it as an excuse. This is like Denver coming to a standstill from a blizzard. Its predictable, expected, you plan for it.
Defense Guy
They had a plan jg, they just didn’t follow it. I guess maybe in time we will find out why.
Mike S
Fair enough. Initially it was in response to Jay’s comment about holding people accountable in the event of an earthquake and it sort of took on it’s own life from there.
jg
So now there can be no comparing stuations? They have to be EXACTLY the same? I give an example of a situation where there is no danger from bad planning yet its unacceptable anyway and this is how you respond?
Nice dodge. Sounds like a Scott Mclelland press conference in here lately.
Demdude
Yep jg this is exactly like a software product rollout. Hell, you should be in charge.
=====================
You’re not qualified jg, no experience with horses.
Narvy
RSA:
Please go upthread and read the posting I referred to.
Narvy
1. I believe the reference was to having a contingency plan for whatever the activity is, be it software or meteorological phenomena.
2. I don’t think it’s so far-fetched to analogize between hurricane and flooding safety measures and software that controls aircraft, rockets carrying human beings, computing stress analyses for skyscrapers … Need I go on? There is actually a technical discipline called Software Safety that deals with it. You could look it up.
Defense Guy
Jeez jg I give you a compliment like that and you get all upset. Relax man. Have a smoke or a joint or something.
jg
According to Jack Cafferty I’m definately not qualified:
p.lukasiak
there are really two different issues here…one without an easy “right or wrong” answer, the other that has an easy one.
The easy one is the complete failure of the only entity with the capacity to respond appropriately to what happened in the AFTERMATH of Katrina (i.e. FEMA) to do so. The city was being flooded, and over 100,000 lives were at risk. And for all intents and purposes FEMA made the situation worse, not better. That was wrong.
The hard question is the issue of state/local preparation for a possible hurricane striking New Orleans. Its a hard question because when one looks at the costs involved in what the critics of state and local officials are saying, its difficult to believe that they themselves would support the kind of additional taxes necessary to accomplish what they demanded.
Its very easy to say “the mayor should have ordered a mandatory evacuation sooner” — but no one knew where the hurricane would make landfall much “sooner” than the mandatory evacuation order was given. As of Saturday, Katrina could have made landfall in the Florida panhandle….and New Orleans would have suffered not much more than Baton Rouge did. And every time you order an “unnecessary” evacuation, fewer and fewer people take it seriously. (the old Boy Who Cried Wolf thing….)
The city has limited resources — and did what it could to evacuate nursing homes and other at risk places where residents were literally incapable of even evacuating themselves to higher ground (let alone leave the city).
And yes there were busses that could have evacuated a few thousand people without transporation….but who was going to drive those busses, and where would they take people? We need to keep in mind that on Saturday, just about the entire state of Louisiana was within the potential path of Katrina’s destruction…..the entire state was in “disaster” mode, and other local governments were concerned with protecting their own citizens. (This failure is thus shared by FEMA, which could have gotten military personnel to drive busses and provided evacuees with temporary shelters in military bases close to N.O. Perhaps if the “disaster exercise” that had been cancelled by FEMA had taken place, this option would have been implemented.)
In other words, its a hard question because you always know that a disasterous hurricane is possible, but by the time you know that a disaster is imminent, there is only a limited amount that can be accomplished — especially solely by state and local government.
IMHO, Nagin’s plan made perfect sense. His plan was to get as many people out of the city as could be reasonably expected, and provide the Superdome as a place where those with no way out of the city could “ride out the storm”. If the storm was non-catastrophic, people would leave the Superdome and return to their homes. If the storm was catastrophic, New Orleans would rely on the state and federal government to evacuate those who remained in the city.
What happened instead was that the storm was not catastrophic—but created an inevitable castastrophe when it resulted in the breeching of numerous levees—unless action was taken quickly by FEMA to save people’s lives. That didn’t happen, and lives were lost…and THAT was wrong.
RSA
Sorry, reading too fast. I don’t have any real insight that goes beyond your questions. It’s possible to take a utilitarian viewpoint, in which the unhappiness of the people bothered by pictures is balanced against the benefit of having the information, a viewpoint that I think is implied by your comment that a moral balancing act is required. Like you, I find this unsatisfactory. I think that there is a set of unresolved moral issues that this situation raises, related to respect for the dead, whether hiding information is equivalent to (white) lying, and so forth.
Narvy
p.lukasiak:
My question on the original posting was about photographing the dead.
As far as I’m concerned, any questions of mangement or institutional responsibility are way beyond easy.
Vladi G
Although Paul’s point really didn’t address what you were after, he’s still right that we are dealing with two questions, one with an easy answer, and one with a difficult answer.
1) Is it right for the federal government (under the guise of FEMA in this case) to restrict the media from documenting the destruction, which includes loss of life. Personally, I think the answer here is pretty obvious. We have a first amendment that protects the press, and absent a solid national security or public safety rationale, FEMA’s refusal to allow the media to do it’s job is clearly wrong.
2) Is it acceptable for the media to print pictures of the dead? This is really something that each person will decide differently. They can choose to publish pictures, and I can choose not to buy their magazines, or newspapers, or watch their programs. But my decision to avoid this material is one I can only make for me. It’s not a decision I want to make for others, and it’s not a decision I want others, certainly not FEMA, to make for me. Some media outlets will decide the material is inappropriate. Some won’t. And if one wants to expose themselves to that material, the first amendment says that they should be allowed to.
Steve S
Well it appears those of us arguing that denying Reporters access to the disaster scene had a compelling argument. Today the reporters are reporting that FEMA and the Guard have changed their tune.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_09_04.php#006461
So it appears John got caught shilling for the Bushies again with faux outrage.
ppGaz
Only if he had never read the publicly available articles on the subject, and didn’t know that it was ver likely that water would top the floodwalls and breach them causing the city to fill up with water … thereby marooning not only the Superdome occupants, but thousands still in their homes, who would then be surrounded by a deadly toxic sea.
All of this, known in advance.
Nagin apparently had no clue, or thought “someone else” would take care of the second half of the problem.
slide
Today the reporters are reporting that FEMA and the Guard have changed their tune.
I think Brian Williams strong commentary on it made them see the errors of their ways. That plus it would have been totally impossible to enforce. I do hope that photographers and newsmedia are very very cautious as to what they show. I belive the dead should be respected and I would not want my mother’s corpse on the front page of the Daily News either. Self restraint should be the order of the day, not government restraint.
W.B. Reeves
The “show some respect for the dead” meme is such a transparent attempt at manipulation it’s painful to see otherwise intelligent people lending it credence.
In the event, I know of no legal basis for such usurpation of the constitution by a government entity.
Vlad
I’m sticking with my original position on the issue: It’s important to document the bodies for historical reasons, and it should be a matter of editor’s discretion whether to run a particular shot or not. They exercised pretty good judgment after the WTC, by and large, and I think they could be counted on to do the same in this case.
Jimmy Jazz
What part of the First Amendment is so confusing to you folks, and what other “thougtful argument” do you need? I guess Bush decided that, because Osama “hates our freedoms”, that destroying those freedoms will make us safe from terrorism.
The only thing this administration is good at is creating an image of strength for stupid and/or shallow people. If they lose that, they literally have nothing. And they know it.
rayabacus
I agree. The media shoud be free to publish/air whatever they think their audience wants.
I think that the general tone of this thread has been that the evil Rove/Bush cartel does not want the pictures shown, so therefore photojournalists are being kept out of the city by the National Guard – some at the point of a gun.
Most of you still do not get it. NOLA is being policed by the National Guard, supporting the NOPD. Both of these units are under the direct command and purview of Gov Blanco and Mayor Nagin, respectively. FEMA and the Federal Government are not calling the shots. If the National Guard is pointing weapons at someone, they are doing so under the direct orders of their Commander in Chief, Governor Blanco. Neither President Bush or his evil manipulator, Rove, have any control over the National Guard or NOPD.
What you are failing to understand is that the system of controls, i.e. “who is in charge” is the same today as it was on the day of Katrina, and every day in between. Blanco has never ceded control of the State personnel to the Federal Government. As such FEMA, who has no police powers, can only assist and coordinate with the State and Local authorities.
The hard fact is, that there is only one source of authority in this disaster, as there always has been, and that is Governor Blanco.
Bob
I need protection from viewing the incompetence of the greedheads who are ruining our country.
And I have it. It’s called NFL football, and it should be on in about an hour and a half.
Mike S
Wait. Are you saying that sending them to the SD shouldn’t have been done altogether? Where would you send them, remembering that they didn’t have enough bus drivers to get everyone out of the city.
They got something like 75-80% evac compliance. That’s pretty good. The problem as I see it wan’t that they went to the SD, but that there wasn’t enough security there, enough foor and a workable evac plan once the storm passed.
Gary Farber
“Jeff Goldstein takes on those suggesting it is absolutely necessary to photograph and pass around pictures of the dead in order to somehow speak ‘truth to power’ about the ‘government failures’ in New Orleans.”
I’ve not read a single post anywhere making such an argument, but there are many loony sites I don’t read, so I’m willing to believe someone is making such a straw argument.
The argument I’m familiar with is: is it necessary for the government to institute mandatory censorship of such photos, or to physically prevent reporters/photographers from taking such pictures? Does this disaster give sufficient cause to over-ride the First Amendment?
It’s not as if anyone, anywhere, for any mainstream publication, has plans to go take pictures of the faces of corpses, do they? Is there a rash of such pictures? If so, where, please? (God knows I don’t want to see them; but if they don’t exist, what’s the problem being solved here?)
Does Jeff address these questions?
Narvy
In an ideal world, yes. But that decision-making is taken out of your hands when you channel surf past Fox News or CNN, when you wait in a supermarket checkout line, when you pick up your paper with the front page exposed. Certainly FEMA is absolutely, completely in the wrong in imposing any kind of censorship as a government body. But that seems to me to be a theoretical argument that avoids the question of the propriety of publishing the pictures. I suppose if it were not for the inevitability of both sides using the pictures (or lack of them) for narrow political ends, this wouldn’t really be a problem. But what we have here is a situation that is detrimental to the country no matter how it’s resolved.
DougJ
Calm down, everybody, the press will be given full access to the town hall meeting Bush has with carefully selected hurricane victims. Isn’t that enough?
jg
I can’t believe people actually think this has anything to do with pictures of corpses. Its called controlling the story. NO PRESS ALLOWED. They can’t be trusted to remain on message.
Narvy
Thank you for your thoughtful argument. I didn’t realize that the First Amendment settled (or overrode?) the moral questions of
But, dense fellow that I am, I’m still missing the part of my own posting that asks about whether the government should prevent the press from taking pictures. Perhaps you can point out the words for me.
Oh, by the way, I thought that the First Amendment issue here, aside from not being my point, was so obvious it didn’t need stating. I apologize for not realizing it would be so confusing to you folks.
Narvy
This person thinks it has to do with exploiting a tragedy for partisan political ends.
DougJ
Personally, I don’t think we need a free press anymore. I mean, what do they do besides play the blame game and report false stories that give aid and comfort to our enemies?
Narvy
You left out the part about displaying the carefully selected Republican corpses.
Narvy
Can’t get rid of it. First Amendment and all that, y’know.
demimondian
Why do you hate America? There are no Republican corpses; old Republicans never die, they just drift off into the sunset on their makeshift rafts.
rayabacus
John,
We’re back to teaching physics to first graders. Jesus, this gets so tiring. Unless I have missed something, and if I have, please enlighten me, FEMA not providing transport in their boats for reporters and photojournalists, would not be considered censorship. A request to not photograph corpses, for the dignity of the dead is not censorship.
Any reporter, I presume, can take his own boat and camera crew and go film as many corpses as he desires. If the National Guard or NOPD prohibit him from doing so, then the reporter needs to take it up with Governor Blanco or Maror Nagin.
I personally think that any reporter that provides his own transport and signs a statement absolving the Government (Local, State & Federal) should be able to go anywhere and film anything as long as he is not interferring with properly credentialed authorities in the performance of their duties.
Narvy
I thought they all had yachts.
.
demimondian
Sorry, I should have clarified: their 100 foot, 500 ton, diesel powered makeshift rafts.
Narvy
Two points:
1. I bought the rumor? lie? meme? that FEMA was prohibiting photographers from taking pictures. I did not check for accuracy, and I regret it.
2. If they provided transport to other non-essential persons but not the press, it could be construed as censorship.
Narvy
Tell me, Dude, what does one have to do to acquire such superiority? And if it’s so tiring, why not take a nap instead of lecturing the first graders?
rayabacus
I agree that there certainly would be the perception of censorship but I can’t think of any other non-essential persons would want to be there.
John S.
Ray-
You are the very epitomé of a doctrinaire.
Why this obsession with first graders learning physics?
rayabacus
Actually, it was a phrase I used a few days ago during John’s rant. I think I said something like, “You would have more success teaching physics to first graders”, addressed to John.
When I got to this thread, the conversation was all about Rove/Bush censoring the journalists. I have a post up above explaining why that was not only not probable but not possible.
I did take a nap – that is why I was late to the party.
DougJ
rayabacus — are you saying that the laws of physics prevent photographers from photographing scenes from New Orleans? Is that part of creation science?
Narvy
Fellow posters:
Those among you who post shallow knee-jerk certainties and snarky insults (and you know who you are, or maybe not) present such an easy target for barbed responses that there’s no challenge, although I have to admit, it’s fun. On the other hand, if you changed your style to civil discussion and asked if your opinions might be debatable or even, heaven forbid, rebuttable, I would be reduced to posting only serious, possibly substantive, comments. So please don’t change. Stay as sweet as you are.
Narvy
Readers of the Weekly World News? Texas Chainsaw Massacre fans?
DougJ
Sometimes the corpses forget their talking points and go off message.
But there is one corpse they identified as a Republican — he’s got his hand in the pockets of one of the other corpses.
Narvy
rayabacus:
That was a civil, not to mention pleasant, response. Thanks. I almost withdraw my “superiority” dig.
rayabacus
Narvy,
You are gracious and welcome.
I say the only laws of physics applicable here has to do with how the photographers transport themselves over the water. If the only way they can do that is by hitching a ride with search and rescue boats, FEMA has said no. That is certainly FEMA’s perogative
If the photographers have their own transport, I say “Shoot away.” The consuming public will tell them whether the photos are a “consumable news” item.
rayabacus
Ooops. Blockquote and rest of the post was in response to DougJ.
Preview. Preview. Preview.
*sigh*
ppGaz
I think the GOP has a handle on this. It’s a multipronged approach.
One, you put the kibosh on any negative reporting or graphics coming out of the controversial area.
Two, you declare all of your own actions and policies to be good and above criticism.
Three, you send your toadies out to bash the victims.
——-//
Alas, for those of you who are up later and catch the rebroadcast of MSNBC Countdown, Keith Olbermann will explain why the end of the Spud Administration may be in sight. Polls cratering, repubs and conservatives criticizing, gaffe after gaffe …..
I realize that this post will release the hounds of the D-D-D-D-D-D-Don’t Blame Bush! Brigade, but you know, sometimes reality just gets its nose in there despite your best efforts.
Narvy
Not to worry. I am a high school graduate and I figured it out.
Narvy
This showed up on another thread, a pointer to which I don’t have handy. But for those of you who may have missed it, I suggested that Sen. Santmoron probably meant flogging the dead bodies until they screamed in pain.
ppGaz
Yes, leading by example. Make it so!
DougJ
I was wondering what Senator Santorum was going to do to those who evaded fines by dying.
Narvy
Yikes! I hope this refers to Sen. Santmoron and not to me.
Narvy
Well, that didn’t work. Let’s try this:
Yikes! I hoped you meant Sen. Santmoron and not me.
Sorry about the wasted bandwidth, but I just can’t seem to get the hang of these new-fangled computer thingies.
I’m curious: Is anything old-fangled?
Narvy
as you can see by my typing “hoped” for “hope”.
ppGaz
Indecision Hampers Aid
The stories just keep piling up. The government appears to be completely inept.
For real entertainment, be sure to catch the MSNBC rebroadcast of Countdown, and the tape from the White House news briefing. Behold, your government in action, in the face of a blistering, simple yes/no question.
Narvy
Appears? APPEARS?? APPEARS???
If there is a God (see other threads) I pray that he lets me live long enough to see the judgment of history on this administration.
Narvy
Thanks. My Tivo is pawing the ground in eager anticipation. And the “Indecision” story boggles the mind. (Whatever boggling is.)
ppGaz
That’s the Washington Times lead editorial today.
Washington Times, well known hangout for vile Bush-haters.
Inadequate Military Response
jg
We are so fucked if something else happens, predictable weather event or ‘predictable’ terrorist attack. Not only are our resources stretched thin but the leadership is so inept its like a bad sitcom watching these people ‘work’.
jobiuspublius
Whining and fixating as usual, boring agitation.
jobiuspublius
Worst POTUS Ever would love an excuse to draft or declare martial law.
jg
He’d probably screw it up and dissolve the government by accident.
ppGaz
DougJ
That’s only because the librul MSM isn’t telling you about all the good news from New Orleans (of course they can’t, because FEMA won’t let them in). The flooding is in its last throes.
ppGaz
Right you are. Crime is down, traffic accidents, down, and a lot of the flora are thriving on the rich nutrients in the irrigation water.
Parking is no problem in the dry areas.
DougJ
Once we root out all the dead-enders, everything should be fine. Freedom is on the march.
Narvy
Along with the alligators, the cottonmouths, the e. coli …
DougJ
Freedom is messy, Narvy.