http://www.nytimes.com/pages
(they actually still list all of these New Orleans reporting/articles under "complete coverage of Hurricane Katrina" - like that is all that defines the city)
Look at the pictures and titles of the articles on the above Web page. They are all incredibly depressing and negative, and the only smiling face in the whole section is Stevie Wonder. Not to worry, even the smiling Stevie picture comes with a headline like "Scars Amid the Party in New Orleans". Today's NY Times article on homelessness in New Orleans (a constant problem, even before Katrina) prompted me to write this e-mail. In particular, this sensational line in the sixth sentence towards the top:
"Not far from the French Quarter, flanking Canal Street on Claiborne Avenue, they are living inside a long corridor formed not of walls and a roof but of the thick stench of human waste and sweat tinged with alcohol, crack and desperation."
This is EXACTLY the type of negative sensationalism I would expect from Fox News or the "new" CNN, not the NY Times. If I searched hard enough, I am sure I could sub "French Quarter" for "Times Square", writing the same sentence about NY and using NY streets. What is the point of language like this?
It is one thing when you believe investigative reporting will bring some type of positive attention to correct an existing problem. However, I have yet to read where a NY Times article on New Orleans (or, Hurricane Katrina Aftermath, as they prefer to call the city) has actually directly helped to affect change or improve conditions in NOLA. Sure, I realize that keeping attention on the city and emphasizing the reality of how things are still not "back to normal" could help to keep the city in the national spotlight for much-needed recovery aid and assistance. But at this point, and after so many negative articles, one can only conclude that the paper is simply reporting on negative issues and human misery to increase readership. It is will known that sex, violence and problems sell in today's media, and New Orleans has all of the above. All these continued negative articles, with no reference to any positive developments, only serves to scare potential visitors away from the city (tourism is still NO's biggest industry) and depress the city's residents. In this way, the NY Times reporting of New Orleans has only ended up hurting the city and its economy through all of its negative coverage. Plenty of residents who have actually LIVED here since the storm have witnessed many positive improvements and progress in recovery after the storm. We acknowledge that progress is slow and there is still work to be done, but we can at least appreciate the amount of progress we HAVE made. 200,000 homes will take more than 3 years to repair, and even 10 years may not be long enough to return to "normal". Many of the problems the city faces now (poverty, poor public education, violence, crime, homelessness), it faced even before the storm. It was only after the storm that any of these problems received national attention, as the national media discovered our existing negative problems (like they were new?) and started increased coverage to boost their ratings. Anderson Cooper is a lovely example of this. He claims to be a "friend of the city", but he did a sensational story on New Orleans entitled "New Orleans: Murder City USA" that, no kidding, actually showed a Fleur De Lis rotating in dripping blood as part of the program. In my opinion, AC360 is NO friend of New Orleans by promoting this type of sensational journalism about the city. I know for a fact that some tourists even canceled their trips to NO after watching this drivel.
Sorry for the rant, but I feel very strongly on the subject. And, I just wanted to let you (my friends) know that you should take the NY Times coverage on NOLA with a grain of salt. I will still continue to read the paper for the breath and depth of its coverage, particularly in the international arena, but I will never trust it for news on NOLA. If you want more accurate information (and even some cautious optimism) on New Orleans' recovery, please look at the Brookings Institution's (a think tank) monthly .pdf reports on the subject here: http://www.brookings.edu
This month's report was not so great, but the reports are generally more constructive than the negative media coverage on the subject. There is no substitute for actually visiting NOLA yourself, so please come down and support our City.
