MaxedOutMama
Thursday, September 08, 2005
A Couple Of Things
Fausta of The Bad Hair Blog (New Jersey + taxes = bad hair) rounds up some good news regarding Katrina. Very well worth reading. Fausta is collecting links about effective responses and recovery, so if you have one go over there and leave it in her comments.
Gindy looks at another disagreement between Nagin and Blanco and asks rhetorically "What is going on?"
Esther of Outside The Blogway covers a Maryland story:
Carl at No Oil For Pacifists is covering the launch of Telesat Canada's Anik F1R satellite, and writes "Sorry for the geek moment, but it's my job." Go for it, Carl. Not that I have any trace of geekiness myself, but I really enjoyed the story.
Darcey of Dust My Broom writes about a bill that the Canadian government is planning to introduce to give the police wide powers over the internet in Congress. For those who don't read very much, I feel the need to remind you of the attempt to shut down any reporting of the testimony about the Gomery Inquiry earlier this year. That inquiry involved a massive slush fund scandal in which it emerged that the Liberal party was handing out massive chunks of cash to ad agencies and requiring massive chunks of cash back in the form of political donations.
But I am sure there is no connection. There couldn't be, right? The fact that it was the bloggers who published the story would have nothing to do with giving the police the right to make ISP's disclose identities, etc, of users, right?
Gindy looks at another disagreement between Nagin and Blanco and asks rhetorically "What is going on?"
Esther of Outside The Blogway covers a Maryland story:
I was born and raised inside the beltway, so I’m especially proud of this story. While I don’t know them, the Libby family of Rockville, Maryland, has taken in 11 people who were left homeless by hurricane Katrina....The Anchoress declares a reality/sanity check is in order for the press. This is written with her trademark passion and eloquence:
Think if the person you loved more than anyone in the world was in that water, would you want his or her picture all over the place? Would you want your pet’s dead, bloated body put out there for all to see?And for some who have been hoping for a reunion, this might be the way they received the bad news. Sorry, sometimes things are simply wrong.
Carl at No Oil For Pacifists is covering the launch of Telesat Canada's Anik F1R satellite, and writes "Sorry for the geek moment, but it's my job." Go for it, Carl. Not that I have any trace of geekiness myself, but I really enjoyed the story.
Darcey of Dust My Broom writes about a bill that the Canadian government is planning to introduce to give the police wide powers over the internet in Congress. For those who don't read very much, I feel the need to remind you of the attempt to shut down any reporting of the testimony about the Gomery Inquiry earlier this year. That inquiry involved a massive slush fund scandal in which it emerged that the Liberal party was handing out massive chunks of cash to ad agencies and requiring massive chunks of cash back in the form of political donations.
But I am sure there is no connection. There couldn't be, right? The fact that it was the bloggers who published the story would have nothing to do with giving the police the right to make ISP's disclose identities, etc, of users, right?
Comments:
<< Home
It was goofy enough as it was with the best coverage of what was going on in Canada coming from the U.S.
I don't even know where to start, but in society that is free, restricting information will never work.
I don't even know where to start, but in society that is free, restricting information will never work.
# posted by 
: 4:57 PM
: 4:57 PM 
Ah-choo! Ah-choo! No flu! I hope it's quite a while before the bird flu makes the final jump, because I don't think we are ready.
I'm w/ you, Tommy. I don't think trying to restrict information is going to be a winning tactic. All it will do is proliferate the growth of bulletin boards and the distribution of ways to mask the source ISP's of posters to them. China is a great example.
I'm w/ you, Tommy. I don't think trying to restrict information is going to be a winning tactic. All it will do is proliferate the growth of bulletin boards and the distribution of ways to mask the source ISP's of posters to them. China is a great example.
At first, I was like you and thought that taking pictures of the dead was just plain wrong. But the more I think about it, the more I think the press would be able to take pictures.
After all, words can never accomplish what pictures can. Was it wrong for the press to take photos of the battle fields strewn with dead Americans during the civil war? Was it wrong to take pictures of the dead and living at the concentration camps in WWII? What about the images of the dead we broadcasted over and over of the Kurds that were gassed in Iraq? Would it have served the Jews or the Kurds not to document the truth? We also broadcasted the pictures of the dead from the tsunami on American TV. Does it serve history to forever wipe the reality away? The gruesome images of tragedy have been and always will be the best tool for reminding us why we do something different now than we did before.
We can write books about the holocaust, but one picture will say more than all the volumes and volumes we could write. This is something that would not be forgotten because it is the loss of life that was the tragedy. Houses can be rebuilt. People can't. And if the images of this tragedy will remind people of what can happen if they don't leave their homes, then we have done an injustice to those who died by not showing the images.
maybe there should be a moratorium on showing the images for 6 months or a year, but it is not something that should be wept under the rug.
I also am noting that you are discussing both censorship as good and bad in the same post.
After all, words can never accomplish what pictures can. Was it wrong for the press to take photos of the battle fields strewn with dead Americans during the civil war? Was it wrong to take pictures of the dead and living at the concentration camps in WWII? What about the images of the dead we broadcasted over and over of the Kurds that were gassed in Iraq? Would it have served the Jews or the Kurds not to document the truth? We also broadcasted the pictures of the dead from the tsunami on American TV. Does it serve history to forever wipe the reality away? The gruesome images of tragedy have been and always will be the best tool for reminding us why we do something different now than we did before.
We can write books about the holocaust, but one picture will say more than all the volumes and volumes we could write. This is something that would not be forgotten because it is the loss of life that was the tragedy. Houses can be rebuilt. People can't. And if the images of this tragedy will remind people of what can happen if they don't leave their homes, then we have done an injustice to those who died by not showing the images.
maybe there should be a moratorium on showing the images for 6 months or a year, but it is not something that should be wept under the rug.
I also am noting that you are discussing both censorship as good and bad in the same post.
Dingo, pictures of the devastation are not what is being argued against.
And no, I am not arguing for government censorship, although I don't think the authorities should allow reporters into morgues to take pictures. I am saying that plastering pictures of individual victims in the newspapers is wrong.
If you read The Anchoress' post, she writes about what the media did after 9/11. They had their own standard, not one the government imposed. This is not new, Dingo. They aren't supposed to print the names of victims before the families are notified. Most papers won't print pictures of traffic accident victims up close. They do have codes of ethics that try to balance the need to report versus the need to respect the rights of victims.
One of the things that is not supposed to happen is that a person is not supposed to pick a paper and see a picture of a dead friend or relative, especially if they didn't even know of the death.
Codes of ethics are not government censorship. The reporters who want to be let into those makeshift morgues in NO are not following the traditional code of the press.
I don't agree that pictures are more expressive than details, btw. I have no problem with taking pictures of devastated areas, etc. It is awful and shocking, but it is not the same thing as a woman in a shelter in TX picking up a paper and recognizing the body of her missing son.
Sorry, some things are wrong.
And no, I am not arguing for government censorship, although I don't think the authorities should allow reporters into morgues to take pictures. I am saying that plastering pictures of individual victims in the newspapers is wrong.
If you read The Anchoress' post, she writes about what the media did after 9/11. They had their own standard, not one the government imposed. This is not new, Dingo. They aren't supposed to print the names of victims before the families are notified. Most papers won't print pictures of traffic accident victims up close. They do have codes of ethics that try to balance the need to report versus the need to respect the rights of victims.
One of the things that is not supposed to happen is that a person is not supposed to pick a paper and see a picture of a dead friend or relative, especially if they didn't even know of the death.
Codes of ethics are not government censorship. The reporters who want to be let into those makeshift morgues in NO are not following the traditional code of the press.
I don't agree that pictures are more expressive than details, btw. I have no problem with taking pictures of devastated areas, etc. It is awful and shocking, but it is not the same thing as a woman in a shelter in TX picking up a paper and recognizing the body of her missing son.
Sorry, some things are wrong.
forgive me if I am wrong, but from the article I have read, the issue was about the press being allowed into the areas that were effected, not into the morgues. If the issue is just about the morgues, than yes, I agree with you.
And if the press does have a code of ethics that they adhere to fairly well, why can't they be let into the affected area? banning the press from going into the 9th ward would be censorship.
And if the press does have a code of ethics that they adhere to fairly well, why can't they be let into the affected area? banning the press from going into the 9th ward would be censorship.
I would think it was because it was to dangerous right now.
Here is one of her links at
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/116602.php
FEMA, which is leading the rescue efforts, rejected requests from journalists to accompany rescue boats as they went out to search for storm victims, Reuters reported.
A FEMA spokeswoman told the wire service that space was need on the rescue boats and assured Reuters that "the recovery of the victims is being treated with dignity and the utmost respect."
"We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media," the spokeswoman told Reuters via e-mail.
FEMA, which is leading the rescue efforts, rejected requests from journalists to accompany rescue boats as they went out to search for storm victims, Reuters reported.
A FEMA spokeswoman told the wire service that space was need on the rescue boats and assured Reuters that "the recovery of the victims is being treated with dignity and the utmost respect."
"We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media," the spokeswoman told Reuters via e-mail.
I have read of several scuffles at the makeshift morgues. I don't think journalists should be accomodated on rescue boats.
Many of these might be freelance photographers too.
Post a Comment
Here is one of her links at
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/116602.php
FEMA, which is leading the rescue efforts, rejected requests from journalists to accompany rescue boats as they went out to search for storm victims, Reuters reported.
A FEMA spokeswoman told the wire service that space was need on the rescue boats and assured Reuters that "the recovery of the victims is being treated with dignity and the utmost respect."
"We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media," the spokeswoman told Reuters via e-mail.
FEMA, which is leading the rescue efforts, rejected requests from journalists to accompany rescue boats as they went out to search for storm victims, Reuters reported.
A FEMA spokeswoman told the wire service that space was need on the rescue boats and assured Reuters that "the recovery of the victims is being treated with dignity and the utmost respect."
"We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media," the spokeswoman told Reuters via e-mail.
I have read of several scuffles at the makeshift morgues. I don't think journalists should be accomodated on rescue boats.
Many of these might be freelance photographers too.
<< Home
