I’ve been following CNN and other major networks coverage of the crisis in Haiti and trust that I have been fuming over how Haiti is truly the “Africa of the Caribbean”. Why is it that reporters are just now ‘discovering’ that Haiti was politically and financially in a mess before this terrible earthquake. I’m glad that there’s aid in the country and I do hope that Haiti remains in the world’s eye view. Remember that Haiti is not it’s own island; it shares its land mass with the Spanish speaking people of the Dominican Republic.
Also, apart from Pat Robertson and the likes, how is it that these peoples spiritual beliefs become newsworthy in a time like this when it should be about unity? By constantly going back to this issue of Vodun there are some people who are being discouraged to support the cause because they do not want to support any ‘voodoo’ practices. The question I want to see answered is will Haiti be given the means to stand on its own feet? Because if people keep fighting over food and supplies in the street and that’s all we see reports on now- a week and a day later when a 5.9 earthquake lasting for about 5 seconds shook the same streets early this morning- then what type of recovery plan can really be in place if these gracious and hardworking aid workers and volunteers have to return to their children and jobs, and Anderson Cooper and others return to their American news rooms?
Thanks to twitter friend @sablikatriumph for sharing this article where a writer points out immediate similarities between media coverage of Hurricane Katrina and the devastating earthquake last week.

For those who know how race and media intersect in times of crisis, the earthquake in Haiti has probably sent a bump through your pop-cultural seismograph [eg the Haiti twibbon or flag twitter display pics].
Following an initial wave of sympathy, the corporate media has turned an alarmed eye to the increasingly desperate masses. We see unruly mobs, bodies piled in the streets (we hear of corpses being used as human “barricades”). The insinuations and direct reporting of violence flirt with the popular imagination and evoke memories of America’s most spectacular prime-time tragedy—Katrina.
The AP reports that the U.S. may consider stepping up its “security role,” while its humanitarian effort continues to hobble amid transportation delays and logistical chaos. Announcing plans to expand the U.S. ground deployment, Adm. Mike Mullen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Friday, “The initial intent is to strategically place some of our soldiers so that they can help with that relief distribution. And then, obviously, we’re all focused on the security piece as well,”
That “security piece” has been a pretty huge chunk of America’s entanglement with Haiti throughout the 20th century, punctuated by military interventions and occupation. Six years after the last U.S.-backed coup, maybe the Pentagon has a hankering for another extended stay.
As the White House wrings its hands over how to keep a tight grip on its aid mission, AirAmerica’s Jack Rice wonders about the role of the media in shaping, and dehumanizing, public perceptions of the tragedy:
Why is it that we don’t hesitate to show a photo of dead bodies if it takes place in Africa, Asia or Latin America? Would we be willing to do the same thing if this happened in Boston, Los Angeles, Minneapolis? Would we be willing to do it if it were dead American soldiers piled up in Afghanistan? My guess is no!
Shades of Katrina emanate from the descriptions of “anarchy” engulfing the streets. Remember the Superdome, the “looting,” the alleged explosion of mayhem? The media conjured images of death and destruction with voyueristic zeal, while curating the stories to fit a prevailing narrative of savagery and social breakdown.
(RACEWIRE.ORG)