Gratuitous or necessary? Take 2….
Hal Boedeker of the Orlando Sentinel questions some of the cable news coverage strategies for Wilma…
Another hurricane, another chance for Anderson Cooper to act like a fool.
Television relayed a lot of vital information Monday morning about Hurricane Wilma’s march through Florida, but the silly moments overshadowed the substantial ones. One reason Floridians feel hurricane fatigue is reporters’ stupefying willingness to stand in lashing winds and carry on like Indiana Jones.
In doing so, they transform reports into misguided adventures. Worse yet, they trivialize the disaster facing their viewers.
Setting the pace for hurricane hot dogs is Cooper, who never misses a chance to throw on his CNN slicker and let the winds pound him. He’s an excellent anchor, but his hurricane observations are often lame.
I agree and knew with only a category 3 making landfall this one was going to get blown out of proportion. Wilma caused damage, and coverage was expected, but there is no reason to make a mountain out of a mole hill and I feel CNN did.
Comment by Anthony — October 26, 2005 @ 3:53 pm
A mountain out of a mole hill? Tell that to the people who lost property and kinfolk in wilma. And the last time I checked, CNN, FNC, MSNBC and The Weather Channel all covered the hurricane. Was it news? YES Will future hurricanes be news? YES
Comment by Anonymous — October 26, 2005 @ 5:37 pm
The cable ratings these days show that CNN has fallen back down to pre hurricane Katrina levels, so I understand why they throw everything they have at each hurricane, bit it a Category 3, 4 or 5.
Comment by anonymous — October 27, 2005 @ 10:30 am