Last week, according to LexisNexis, there were more than 2,000 newspaper and
wire stories on Hurricane Katrina, along with blanket coverage on cable
news.
This hurricane of hurricane retrospectives was no doubt long in the works,
as editors like to put stories "in the can" for vacation time. The media
seemed to cover every angle, particularly the Bush administration's missteps
in response to the disaster. And while some might quibble with this or that
characterization or selection of facts, ultimately the media were doing what
they're supposed to do: hold government accountable.
But there was one thing missing from the coverage of this natural, social,
economic and political disaster: the fact that Katrina represented an
unmitigated media disaster as well.
Few of us can forget the reports from two years ago. CNN warned that there
were "bands of rapists, going block to block." Snipers were reportedly
shooting at medical personnel. Bodies at the Superdome, we were told, were
stacked like cordwood. The Washington Post proclaimed in a banner headline
that New Orleans was "A City of Despair and Lawlessness" and insisted in an
editorial that "looters and carjackers, some of them armed, have run
rampant." Fox News anchor John Gibson said there were "all kinds of reports
of looting, fires and violence. Thugs shooting at rescue crews." These
reports actually hindered rescue efforts, as emergency crews wasted valuable
time avoiding phantom snipers.
TV reporters raced to the bottom to see who could moralistically preen the
most. Interviewers transformed into outright scolds of administration
officials. Meanwhile, the distortions, exaggerations and flat-out fictions
being offered by New Orleans officials were accelerated and amplified by the
media echo chamber. Glib predictions of 10,000 dead, and the chief of
police's insistence that there were "little babies getting raped," swirled
around the media like so much free-flowing sewage.
It was as though journalistic skepticism of government officials was
reserved for the White House, and everyone else got a free pass.
Of course the Bush administration made serious mistakes - politically,
logistically and otherwise - in a difficult situation. But Katrina unleashed
a virus of sanctimony and credulity for urban legends almost without
precedent.
Reports of the Superdome being a slaughterhouse were repeated, even though
dozens of news organizations had access to the building. CBS alone had 200
people in New Orleans, and yet it couldn't find those bodies stacked to the
ceiling or a single rape victim from the roving bands of "Mad Max"-style
marauders. That's because nobody was raped or murdered in the Superdome.
The deluge in New Orleans elicited a deluge of wish fulfillment in the
media, as though the hurricane was a biblical sign that something was very
wrong in George W. Bush's America. "Everything changed" because of Katrina,
insisted CNN's Anderson Cooper. Translation: We're going to tell the story
we want to tell about the country from now on. Race and class became the
chief prisms for viewing the disaster. Katrina was even portrayed as the
result of global warming, which (of course!) is Bush's fault.
During last week's bonfire of Katrina navel-gazing, there was virtually no
mention of the hyperventilating and inaccurate media reports, even though
these facts are by now well-established. Terms such as "rape gangs" and
"snipers" do not appear in virtually any of the mainstream media's
retrospectives. It's as if it never happened.
Why? I think the answer is complex, but three factors are surely involved.
One, the media are often good watchdogs of government but rarely of
themselves. While recycling old complaints about government is permissible,
dwelling on your colleagues' failures - or your own - just isn't done.
Two, the media have convinced themselves that they did a wonderful job of
covering Katrina, showering themselves with awards in response. Dan Rather
spoke for his colleagues when he said, "Everybody across the board did such
a good job." It was one of the "quintessential great moments in television
news ... right there with the Nixon-Kennedy debates, the Kennedy
assassination, Watergate coverage, you name it."
Well, as the disgraced former news anchor might say, that makes as much
sense as a cat working as a rocking-chair inspector.
And, lastly, journalists are invested in the dominant narratives of Katrina,
and they'll be damned if they'll let go, particularly if it comes at the
expense of their own credibility, or make Bush's mistakes seem a little less
horrendous.
No, it would be better, and much easier, to print the legend.