The document discusses effective and ineffective media coverage of Hurricane Katrina. It provides examples of coverage that was proactive, fact-based, and constantly updated during and after the storm (effective), as well as coverage that jumped to conclusions, undermined the emergency response, or created divisions between groups (ineffective). Examples discussed include a pre-storm Atlanta Journal article that addressed key public concerns, a post-storm CNN interview focusing on relief efforts, and articles that inappropriately shifted focus or pitted communities against each other.

1. Katrina COVERAGE PRESENTATION BY Megan, elizabeth, cindy, jimmy, & glenn

3. Weather Forecasts

4. Explains vulnerability of New Orleans

6. Article touches on key questions that people would want to know.

7. Are people leaving?

8. Can they leave?

9. Are people stranded?

10. Why is there such a sense of fear?

12. Credible Sources

13. Factual instead of dramatized

15. Undermines the state of emergency

16. Lack of Context

18. Emotional triggering with pictures and video clips of the people and the damagehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVT74piVBGw

22. Dallas Morning News reports, “most Katrina evacuees will learn to move past their tragedy.”