News-Record.com

Yep. They'll own it and write it with the slant they see fit.

The editor is already on record as laying all the blame at the feet of President Bush. (This came a week after the storm hit with no research.)

All the coverge of "their story" will be filtered through that lens.

I would say I am surprised, but, sadly, I am not.

Huey Long once said, "Some day Louisiana will have honest government, and they won't like it."

That newspaper certainly won't help them get their honest government.

Jim, perhaps you'll turn out to be right and I'll turn out to be wrong. If so, I'll admit it right here. But what say we judge 'em on the anniversary of the hurricane, shall we? Right now, they're still locked out of their building and most of the staff is homeless.

San Francisco has prepared for a major earthquake like the one in 1906. Check out

http://www.72hours.org

After you explore the boxes, click on City Emergency Plan or go to
http://www.sfgov.org/site/oes_index.asp?id=27514

Explore Home, About Us, Programs & Forums

How Do I ... get invloved? See NERT on the left, ...prepare an emergency plan

Related Links See SFNERT The leaders of San Francisco understand that they need to rely on themselves for 72 hours. Every state, county (parish), city, town, and village should develop a plan like San Francisco's.

Geez, Lex, don't you bash our government enough over at your vomit-blog "Blog On The Run?"
Why do you insist on assaulting our intelliegence here as well?

Help me out here, Larry: Explain, please, how I've bashed our government in this post or in my responses to the comments. Specific examples, please.

Well, Lex, you posted a link to a Bush-bashing editorial. Do you agree with that editorial or not? If not, why no disclaimer or comment from you that you don't agree?
No disclaimer tells me you agree with it, and are posting it as further "education" for us poor, misguided conservatives.
I will admit, though, that you don't call people profane and obscene names when you disagree with them here like you do on your own blog. I guess the N&R isn't eager to let you spew your filth on their pages.

Uh, no, I posted a link to a first-person story at American Journalism Review by a Times-Picayune reporter on what it was like to cover Katrina. At least, that's what I *thought* I linked to. Right now, the ajr.org server isn't responding, so I can't tell if I mis-linked or fix the link if I did. I'll keep checking.

Update, 7 a.m. Saturday: ajr.org server still isn't responding.

Update, 3:30 p.m. Saturday: Still down. As Spock might say, "Fascinating, Captain."

Jim, Larry -

I just read a story about a group of reporters desperately trying to do their jobs in the hopes of conveying exactly what has happened in the midst of the chaos spawned by a colossal hurricane. I read about them grappling with their emotions over the destruction in their hometowns while they tried to help others the only way they knew how.

You read "an anti-Bush editorial" written by people sitting back and wondering how they best slant it.

Did we read the same thing? If so, can you explain to me how you read a piece like that and feel nothing but petty partisanship? How you can discount the risky attempt at chronicling something so important just because you don't like their bosses' word choice? (In less dire terms -- would YOU like to be held responsible for everything YOUR boss says?)

Are we now too partisan to be human?