katrina-2yrs later

[rainbabies]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20364536/?gt1=10252

[Michele]

I am sooo sick of hearing about this freaking storm! It was a hurricane, it was bad, the poorly planned city flooded like they said it would, the gangs need to re-establish turfs so the city is too crime ridden to rebuild. Them's the risks of living in a ghetto-filled bowl below sea-level in the path of hurricanes.



I think I'm just way overexposed here in NW Louisiana.

ETA: I know it wasn't just New Orleans that was affected....but you'd think that the way people talk around here.

[GrayMatterWife]

um i just thought the pics were interesting.

that is all.

They were interesting. Thanks for sharing!

And it is overexposed because the tragedy is being exploited as a political statement, by both sides.

...Sorry! But if anyone is interested, I have an only-remotely-related rant:

But, I take the Katrina overexposure any day over the overexposure (in more ways than one!) of Idaho Senator Craig. News people: please stop explaining in lurid detail, during daytime broadcasting hours, what "cruising" entails in terms of searching public restrooms for anonymous gay sex. We all get what it is that he is alleged to have done. Yes, thank you. Maybe he and Mark Foley should get together for a late-night text page session at LaGuardia. They could call themselves the Rowdy Randy Republicans and invite former NJ Gov. Mark Greevey as a bipartisan gesture of support across the aisle. But do we really need to be indundated every 15 minutes with a new 3-minute news segment on the "code behaviors" of cruisers? What exactly does that add to the coverage of the story...remember...the actual story?

Face it, media, you're just exploiting the fact that it involved homosexual sex. It's not like you're covering it as a story of adultery. Such hypocrisy: the mainstream media wants (demands), as seen through its general story and editorial coverage, for everyone be "tolerant" (which, I think, really means, "wholly endorsing") of alternate lifestyles, but then uses the "alternate" nature of the story as the story hook. Um, that's not tolerance; that's exploitation and pandering. So, what the media wants is adoption by the viewing public of the PC-mandated moral code, unless, of course, it can get ratings by exploiting the fact that the story involved (this phrase is used every single time) "anonymous gay sex." And they run are all sorts of "anonymous gay sex" related stories, too, just to completely milk it. One of the networks was interviewed a guy who runs a website dedicated to advocating for and coordinating cruising. This "related story" was substantively insignificant and added nothing to the actual story: it was simply an opportunity to keep the viewer interested with the promise of salacious details about other people's sexual proclivities. And a chance to stare at some guy who encourages others to participate in activities that the media knows are considered totally foreign to most people. It's like trotting out a disfigured creature at a sideshow carnival for everyone to stare at, for shock value. But even worse--because there's no acknowledgment that this is outside the norm, and possibly includes the tacit implication that this is the norm for gay people who are not "out." If I were gay, I would be so pissed.

[Michele]

um i just thought the pics were interesting.

that is all.

They were interesting. Thanks for sharing!

And it is overexposed because the tragedy is being exploited as a political statement, by both sides.

Oh. Oops. yes, they are neat pics. sorry. Overexposure talking.