Quote
Originally posted by: ADigitalMan
2) Since the news media CAN seem to get into the area, why can't they put down their high-and-mighty objective coverage and actually get involved with the relief effort? If you're getting into the area to cover it, bring some damn food and water to share while you're at it. Don't just take pictures of people dying, do something to help them. These are your fellow citizens who granted you that first amendment. Journalistic ethics my ass -- what's ethical about a policy of non-involvement when fellow citizens are dying in front of your very eyes?
Here the problem with what you ask. If the media people drop their cameras and etc to help these people, they can't cover it. And then we will have no idea what's going on down there. Also it is a question of ethics once you get involved, how can you give non biased coverage? Tell me without the media covering this, do you think as many people would be giving blood and donating food, water and supplies? I doubt it. Unless there is no other way, the media should stay out of it and give non biased coverage. It is important we are able to stay informed about the situation. If however someone is going to die and there is no one else around who can help and no other way, then they should give assistance.