4 ms·

The truly messed up thing about this - that we should be very angry about - is the U.S. Government is helping out in the cover up. Yes, companies are supposed t

The truly messed up thing about this - that we should be very angry about - is the U.S. Government is helping out in the cover up. Yes, companies are supposed to spin and do damage control. I guess getting the coast guard to give you hand is probably a pretty effective way to do that. Also, it should be noted that print media has been in a downward spiral for the last four years and no longer has the reporters, photographers or resources they did five years ago, let alone 21 years ago. New media to the rescue? Where's the bloggers an community journalists covering this?

ars 16y ago
But why? Why is the coast guard helping? The article didn't even conjecture a reason, they just stated it baldly.
- mcantelon 16y ago
  I'd guess BP is paying someone off.
  - ars 16y ago
    SomeONE? Maybe you didn't notice but the coast guard is not one person. I find it hard to believe they could pay off enough, or high enough, level people for that to be possible.
    - jbooth 16y ago
      Might've been an instance of a not-paid-off coast guard douche getting all authoritative on some reporters. Reporters then write story blaming the coast guard. Or who knows. It's probably not a conspiracy though.
    - mcantelon 16y ago
      >SomeONE? Maybe you didn't notice but the coast guard is not one person. One characteristic of hierarchy is that influencing one person ends up influencing many. >I find it hard to believe they could pay off enough, or high enough, level people for that to be possible. BP is a very connected company. I doubt very much that influencing high-ups is only possible in non-US countries.
- invisible 16y ago
  They ever-so-slightly hinted that it may be because of the massive demand for media coverage the coast guard has received. I don't really know though - I've seen some pretty damaging pictures, but I suppose not as bad as the pictures could be.
- brown9-2 16y ago
  Less press coverage is good for the government as well, as the focus will only turn to "why haven't you been able to stop this yet?"
ascuttlefish 16y ago
Unfortunately, lone bloggers and community journalists don't have the resources to fight a legal battle if caught. Back in the golden age of print media, you at least had the possibility of support from the publication you worked for or its parent company.
- foomarks 16y ago
  Wait-a-sec, what about the kids over at Crisis Commons (http://oreil.ly/dm1OW0 http://oreil.ly/dm1OW0) and Grassroots Mapping(http://bit.ly/99sLWo http://bit.ly/99sLWo) considered community journalists, and doing their best to work around the resources issue?
  - ascuttlefish 16y ago
    That's great stuff! I guess I didn't mean no one's actually doing it, but that there used to be a whole industry interested in and capable of doing amazing investigative journalism with backers willing to stand up for them. If these guys run afoul of the law, how long will they last?

ars 16y ago

But why? Why is the coast guard helping? The article didn't even conjecture a reason, they just stated it baldly.

mcantelon 16y ago
I'd guess BP is paying someone off.
- ars 16y ago
  SomeONE? Maybe you didn't notice but the coast guard is not one person. I find it hard to believe they could pay off enough, or high enough, level people for that to be possible.
  - jbooth 16y ago
    Might've been an instance of a not-paid-off coast guard douche getting all authoritative on some reporters. Reporters then write story blaming the coast guard. Or who knows. It's probably not a conspiracy though.
  - mcantelon 16y ago
    >SomeONE? Maybe you didn't notice but the coast guard is not one person. One characteristic of hierarchy is that influencing one person ends up influencing many. >I find it hard to believe they could pay off enough, or high enough, level people for that to be possible. BP is a very connected company. I doubt very much that influencing high-ups is only possible in non-US countries.
invisible 16y ago
They ever-so-slightly hinted that it may be because of the massive demand for media coverage the coast guard has received. I don't really know though - I've seen some pretty damaging pictures, but I suppose not as bad as the pictures could be.
brown9-2 16y ago
Less press coverage is good for the government as well, as the focus will only turn to "why haven't you been able to stop this yet?"

ascuttlefish 16y ago

Unfortunately, lone bloggers and community journalists don't have the resources to fight a legal battle if caught. Back in the golden age of print media, you at least had the possibility of support from the publication you worked for or its parent company.

foomarks 16y ago
Wait-a-sec, what about the kids over at Crisis Commons (http://oreil.ly/dm1OW0 http://oreil.ly/dm1OW0) and Grassroots Mapping(http://bit.ly/99sLWo http://bit.ly/99sLWo) considered community journalists, and doing their best to work around the resources issue?
- ascuttlefish 16y ago
  That's great stuff! I guess I didn't mean no one's actually doing it, but that there used to be a whole industry interested in and capable of doing amazing investigative journalism with backers willing to stand up for them. If these guys run afoul of the law, how long will they last?