Katrina and the Internet

While taking a cruise around Romenesko, I came across a story in the Los Angeles Times discussing the Internet's benefit in covering the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina on the Gulf Coast.

Not that I'm the biggest fan of the Los Angeles Times (my previous run-in), but this article made some interesting points.

Sure, the Internet has been a factor of major news stories in recent years. The Dan Rather memo incident comes to the top of my mind. But Dan Rather not fact checking enough doesn't cause large newspapers such as the Times-Picayune in New Orleans to switch over to online publishing only. That took one hell of a hurricane.

Since the entire city had been cleared out, most of the Times-Picayune's subscription based wouldn't be around to pick up their papers. So why print?

How about just moving over to web publishing through NOLA.com?

So despite the massive disaster going on in Louisiana, the Times-Picayune keeps publishing.

Technology has also allowed common people to become journalists. Digial cameras, cell phone cameras, voice recording, and regular blogging can (and has been) used by people in the hurricane zone to document their surroundings.

In other words, the gap between journalism and the public is reduced dramatically with situations like Katrina. It becomes less possible to distinguish between one or the other.