How many people live in New Orleans? A couple of million? How many were still there after the evacuation?
How many folks are employed by FEMA or are contracted to respond? And lived RIGHT in that area so that no need to call responders and mob-up for the job was necesary? A few dozen in the best case scenario? Same with equipment, how much was right THERE in New Orleans, waiting for a hurricane, available at an instant’s notice with no need to mob?? Access to knowledge regarding New Orleans for those getting shipped in from out of state to assist?
And so on. Even if the response had been the most perfect job that FEMA has ever pulled off EVER physics still apply. People have to be contacted, outfitted, shipped in, put in the vehicles or positions in which they are going to then go out from in order TO start rescuing people.
There is no physical way that every person could have been instantly rescued, reimbursed for their losses, put into perfect home environment shelters, and made whole in any way shape or form that would have been acceptable to every person affected.
It is inevitable, because of the hurricane, and the hurricane’s aftermath that any number of people would have suffered adverse affects simply due to that only so much can be done in these sorts of tragedies.
So, in other words, why bother with disaster management at all?
I have no doubt that there are THOUSANDS of people whose lives could have been saved, had the government not screwed up royally on all levels. But the way you’re talking, CanvasShoes, it’s as if the difference in consequence between the current scenario and a “perfect government response” is so negligible as to be inconsequential. Is that what you’re trying to convey?
Noooo. Not even remotely close to what I’m saying. Not sure how you even managed to glean that from what I posted.
I am not sure if there could have, or could have NOT been “thousands” whose lives could have been saved hand this been handled “correctly” whatever that may turn out to be. I will open-mindedly await the full disclosure of the investigation into the alleged incompetencies, illegalities, disrimination and so forth before I do make that decision.
That said, it’s quite obvious to me that someone dropped the ball somewhere, and quite badly too. But people seem to be taking that, and transferring their pain and outrage for the ENTIRE disaster onto JUST that likely occurance. It’s as if both those in this thread and IRL are of the mind that if only the errors and incompetency hadn’t happened, that NONE of this horror would have happened, and ONLY the pictures will tell the “truth” (whatever that may ultimately turn out to be).
And, with that in mind, what I am saying is that photos of the dead aren’t what will, or will not in the future be the be-all and end-all of what could make a positive difference when inadequate responses happen. Though I can very much understand the desperate need to hang the blame on something (that something in this case being the disallowed photos), however misguided.
I hoped that wasn’t what you were saying/implying, which is why I asked.
I think it’s clear that more than one “someone” dropped the ball, and that the scale and…I can’t think of another word but “inhumanity,” but that’s not what I mean. Subhuman conditions. The utter mess that’s in New Orleans right now could have been significantly – significantly – decreased had government preparation and response been better.
That’s one of the reasons, but certainly not the only reason, why photojournalism is important.
Good. I certainly wouldn’t want that to be the impression. As to your last sentence. …“that’s why photojournalisim is so important”.
As I’ve said before in this thread, I do AGREE with that. But my major beef with the OP’s beef and that of others is that it seems, and it is likely just their anguish talking, that so many people are seeing this as :
Photos get taken and displayed = heads will roll, people will care, justice will be served
Photos don’t get taken and displayed = no one cares, FEMA will get off scot free, anarchy will rein.
And THAT is the mentality that is buggin’ me. I do, for the record, agree that these things should be documented. But I strenuously DISAGREE that the lack of documentation is what is standing between the victims of the incompetent response, and justice.
I’ve got no problem with preserving history. What I don’t like is seeing “shocking new footage” trumpeted before every news broadcast or pictures of dead bodies being used to sell newspapers. Just because the press seems to have gotten their balls back doesn’t mean that they’re saints all of a sudden.
Well, consider: Inflaming the public after 9/11 would likely have encouraged anger and possibly hate crimes against Muslims, Arab-Americans and Arab immigrants. Inflaming the public over Katrina would direct their anger toward the city, state and federal efforts and their lack of a strong, coordinated response.
furt. That’s only true of straight news (to a degree) and a common misconception when applied to the news industry as a whole. The press has never been completely impartial and has frequently taken stands against injustice.