[words and photo manipulations by karl carlson. unmanipulated photos stolen from the internet.]

the following article takes a brief look at the corporate news media’s coverage of Hurricane Katrina from an anarchist perspective. i’ve chosen not to deal with the actual “meat” of the disaster for a couple of reasons. first of all, i don’t have any expertise in meteorology, disaster management, or topography. second of all, there’s probably nothing i could say about the hurricane itself that hasn’t already been said: it was one crazy ass storm, and the destruction it left behind cannot be understated. similarly to how i reacted when i heard news of the tsunami, i’m asking anyone who reads this site to donate whatever they can to one of the many organizations trying to pick up the pieces. let’s hope the waters recede soon.

Breaking News! BREAKING FUCKING NEWS!

Over the past week, millions of words and thousands of images have spilled out of and into our collective consciousness about one of the worst meteorological ass-kickings the US gulf coast has ever experienced. It’s been the biggest story to hit the press since the bombings of London this past July, and clearly the media sharks have been hungry. Unlike the cell-phone video and digital images of the London bombings, nearly all of the coverage of the ongoing disaster has been produced and delivered by the corporate news media, with no end in sight. The absence of independently produced imagery has marked a return to the status quo for the agenda-setting press, and the result has been sadly predictable.

The agenda-setting press determines the pace for how and when news is delivered, and what tone each story takes. In a world with 5000 channels to choose from (but only 5 major players distributing content), the news becomes a numbers game where only those with the capital can compete. It’s how your local channel gets those stunning aerial shots of an inundated New Orleans. It’s how every news channel seems to be covering the same thing, at the same time.

When London was bombed this past July, independent eyewitnesses were active agents in “producing” the news through the use of cell-phone video and digital camera technology. Those independent sources offered real time coverage direct from the crime scenes, spreading images and video that the agenda-setters could not have provided because of a slow response time. The media created by these independent sources was quickly appropriated and distributed worldwide by the mainstream press who labeled it “revolutionary”, as if independent media never existed before. The low quality video and grainy images of the London attacks were a huge hit, and the mainstream media seemed like they had found a new ally in their quest to deliver the headlines.

So how can we account for the absence of independent media influencing the output of mainstream news before, during and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? Much has been written about “Katrina’s Unequal Toll”, how the hurricane disproportionately affected people of color and the poor (often one and the same group). Those too poor to leave New Orleans were left to fend for themselves, and it’s safe to assume that they were not equipped with the cutting edge technology that has made on-the-spot media production possible. Let’s put it this way: if you’re too poor to leave town, chances are you’re too poor to have a cell phone with video capabilities or even a cheap digital camera. And even if you could afford the technology, beaming the content out of the disaster area would probably be impossible because of a battered information infrastructure.

Looters, Half-Truths, and Anarchy.

When news channels like CNN, NBC, ABC and FOXNEWS are left to their own devices, their output is typically sensationalistic, biased, and problematic overall. With no independent sources feeding content to the agenda-setters and very little independent coverage leaking out through other avenues, the mainstream press has been back to its usual un-checked self. Several stories transcended the headlines this past week and offered us a glimpse into the true nature of monopolistic journalism. What can we learn from the past week of coverage?

A) What makes a “finder” a keeper and the “looter” a weeper? According to photos posted by the AP, AFP and YahooNews! this week [shown above], the colour of your skin has a lot to do with it. All three organizations got a tremendous amount of flak for their racist captioning, and the incident brought the media itself under public scrutiny in a big way. YahooNews! quickly issued a damage control statement and the AFP pulled the photos altogether. To anyone still under the illusion the corporate media are “fair”, “accurate”, or “unbiased”, this should be a big, waterlogged wake-up call.

B) In the race to fill space in a never-ending news cycle, corporate news outlets seem to have gotten desperate with the details. An article credited to AP and Reuters included a blurb about sharks swimming in the streets of New Orleans, and this urban legend has spread to conversations all across North America within a matter of hours. To paraphrase an old cliché: The bigger (and more pointless) the lie, the faster it spreads. Is it too much to ask that corporate media cuts out the shit and gives more space to some real issues?

C) Finally, sensationalism sells, and what’s more sensational than the big bad spectre of ANARCHY??? It all ties in, doesn’t it? Looters, Landsharks and Anarchy, oh my! Anarchy is still synonymous with chaos, and nothing sells more newspapers than chaos. The agenda-setting Canadian press had a field day last week, with the Toronto Star, National Post, and Globe and Mail all joining in the fun. The Toronto Star‘s front page spread on Friday was especially sensational, complete with red ink for the full effect.

Where’s The Anarchy At, Really?

Amid all of the chaos, misinformation and wreckage of Katrina, some real anarchy based on mutual aid did emerge. On computer screens, on rooftops, and in soup kitchens, real anarchism was there if you could look past the monolith of the mainstream press.

- Regularly updated independent media, circumventing the corporate press, was delivered to the world via The Interdictor‘s blog. Based in the DirectNIC headquarters in Downtown New Orleans, his blog contains plenty of eyewitness information and TONS of photos.

- Food For Life, an organization that was on the ground and helping out during last year’s Tsunami, has a team cooking and serving hot vegetarian meals to needy families, from their farm in Carriere, Mississippi. They’re providing aid to people directly affected by the disaster, now, and could use all the help they can get to keep the aid itself cruelty-free.

- Many organizations are mobilizing to help save the animals affected by Hurricane Katrina. While their website is not yet updated with Katrina-specific information, Farm Sanctuary is currently mobilizing to save the forgotten and unspoken victims of the Hurricane, the thousands upon thousands of abandoned farm animals. Through all of these organized efforts, local newspapers from the surrounding areas are reporting just as many individual stories of people helping out those animals left to die.

Closing Thoughts.

In times of crisis and catastrophe, can we trust the corporate media to deliver the news in a manner that we’re comfortable with? I can’t speak for “we”, so it really depends on who you are and what you feel is acceptable. The corporate media has helicopters, video-screens, connections to state and federal authorities, and correspondents. If you’re looking for flash, flair and finesse in the delivery of your news, the corporate media can be a satisfying source. Still, because of a non-stop 24-hour news cycle, the mainstream press often releases news bogged down with sensationalism [see: ANARCHY!!!], padded by misinformation [see: shark tales], and in a manner that reveals deep-seated biases and prejudice [see: racist captioning]. If you accept these characteristics of the corporate media to be true, there’s really only one question you need to ask yourself next time disaster strikes somewhere: what are you willing to sacrifice in your journalism to get your news?