Note: This is only the second in a series in which I monitor what Brian Williams and NBC Nightly News cover and note what news out of New Orleans, Mississippi, and the rest of the over Great Britain-sized area struck by Katrina and Rita has been missed. For the backstory and reasons this promises to be a lengthy series see my first installment.
To Brian Williams:
This may sound like I'm talking to Britney Spears, but, oops--you've done it again! Last night's was your 47th newscast since you last aired a full report on Katrina- and other storm-related news. And this has gotten to be Extremely Annoying.
Here's one thing you missed, which aired on our local NBC affiliate following your newcast: A federal appeals court in New Orleans ruled in favor of State Farm. Per the Associated Press
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld policy language that a major insurer has used to deny hundreds of policyholders’ claims on the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans overturned a federal judge’s ruling that a key clause in State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.’s homeowner policies is ambiguous and therefore cannot be enforced.
The article adds that the insurer's policies cover wind damage but not that from water and also says
damage from a combination of wind and flood water can be excluded from coverage by "anti-concurrent cause" language in its policies.
This ruling overturns a Gulfport, Mississippi judge's ruling in favor of a Long Beach couple who'd lost their home in Katrina, but as noted this has implications for hundreds of property owners in the storm zone. Score another one for Big Insurance.
And that's not the only Mississippi news you missed yesterday--you missed El Supremo's (Gov Haley Barbour's) re-election to the governor's mansion. Though of course you wouldn't have had election results yet, you could have said what observers had been predicting--that Barbour would win hands down. Not surprisingly, considering Mississippi's match made in heaven with President Bush, a friend of Barbour's, which has been doing a good job for his people by seeing that over two years after Katrina the casinos are open and bringing that state a disproportionate amount of Katrina rebuilding aid. See
"Divide And Conquer: Bush's Gulf Strategy" for more details. This made him so popular it didn't seem to matter that this extra aid doesn't seem to be trickling down to Katrina survivors, many of whom are still in FEMA trailers. And take a look at how Barbour and his family and friends have been profiting in the storm's aftermath. This would be an excellent topic for an NBC Nightly investigation sometime--though I don't think your masters in the White House would approve of such embarrassing things being reported about such a valuable ally.
Last night, you did cover plenty of substance--rising oil prices, newsbriefs on Pakistan, Afghan and Iraq, the heart disease risk for women on the pill, and wind power.
And your piece on the head of Yahoo's defending his having given to the Chinese goverment the name of a user--a reporter who's now in prison--was interesting. The head of Yahoo had said he'd done this in order to comply with Chinese law.
I am Extremely Annoyed--not at the fact that this was covered, because as noted I'd found it interesting--but because of the chilling implications. And some questions that have popped into my mind. For example, if Yahoo's head had done this unconscionable thing because he'd had to under China's repressive law, could something like that happen here? Can it happen now under the Patriot Act? Or after the Bush/Cheney junta have declared themselves President and Vice President for life?
Now for what was really Extremely Annoying: your interview with Rudy Giuliani. And here's why: Iraq was the only substantive campaign issue you asked him about. Most everything else was about style, personal stuff, and backstory. So it was as if you'd been throwing softballs at some media-whorish celebrity instead of holding a serious presidential contender's feet to the fire.
Giuliani could have been asked about Big Insurance and its impact on Katrina recovery and on other coastal areas. Because Big Insurance has not only just succeeded in not compensating storm damage to hundreds, whose homes had been obliterated to the slabs, per the ruling mentioned above, but has also, by raising its rates in a big way, made buying insurance cost-prohibitive for people not only in Mississippi and Louisiana, where it's crushing storm recovery, but in Florida and other coastal states--even as far north as New York! (Of course, being GOP, he probably would have supported Big Insurance, but it would have been good to have his views brought out in the open.)
Giuliani could also have been asked what he would do to spur rebuilding and recovery in New Orleans--if even though he's a member of the GOP a Giuliani Administration would treat that city any better than has the Bush Administration.
And that's not all--he could also have been asked about health care, Social Security, immigration, the environment, trade (the fact that we've been importing so much from China that's poisoned or otherwise dangerous), civil rights, poverty, education, infrastructure improvement, etc. The list of substantive issues you didn't ask about goes on and on. And these are all real issues that affect real people.
I know the corporate masters to whom you're subservient would not have approved. But, Brian, it's time to show some chutzpah and bring them up, Be sure you bring these things up the next time you interview a presidential candidate. So we the people know where they stand on the issues that affect us and that we care deeply about.