Applied Epistemology

I don't think it's necessary to explain the quote. When I read it I immedately thought not of the credulity of the people in the Superdome but the media ghoulish appetite for horror.

People predicted a "Lord of the Flies" scenario for the Superdome before Katrina struck NOLA. The media indulged in a morbid bit of wish fulfillment and had a ready supply of viewers willing to believe the worse about poor minorities. That's the disease vector here.

Wow - I read that article and then the final quote on the first page.

Times-Picayune Editor Jim Amoss cited telephone breakdowns as a primary cause of reporting errors, but said the fact that most evacuees were poor African Americans also played a part.

"If the dome and Convention Center had harbored large numbers of middle class white people," Amoss said, "it would not have been a fertile ground for this kind of rumor-mongering."

Cause black people they be stupid. As opposed the middle class white people are smartriffic!. One these same middle class white folks, sent me an email the Clinton refusing to meet the Gold Star Mothers and how the Clintons were screwing the government by charging too much rent to the Secret Service. He also sent me the story on the camel spiders in Iraq. No rumor mongering there. As you might guess both rumors are entirely false. Check out Clinton Gold Star Mother Rumor

If you bothered to look up the background of Times-Picayune editor Jim Amoss, you would most likely understand the quote above. It is obvious that he is criticizing the media's role in the rumor-mongering. He mentions, "the fact that most evacuees were poor African Americans also played a part" because this is a primary reason for why the media spread so many rumors. Now, you all need to stop spreading rumors about Mr. Amoss, who is without a doubt one of the “good-guys.” Why don’t you look up the entire New Orleans race-relations project he headed, and then reconsider your view of this quote?

It looks like Mike and I will be eating a heaping helping of Crow on this one. The funny thing was you wouldn't have gotten the guys background from reading the article. You have wander off seperately to find it. How about a Wikipedia entry or something for background.

Yes, I misread the comment (and realized that a day afterward). But the original article is just poorly written. Amoss and the LAT reporter don't openly state "the media was racist" (since then they'd have to back up the charge, and specify who's guilty), so instead they make a passive voice innuendo that is so vaguely expressed it's easy to misunderstand, even in context.

Check out the comment titled "Of course, I could be wrong" (and its date posted) directly above. Looks like I'm not the only person to make an o'erhasty post.