The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
How businesses handle a disaster; how a network can use a disaster to make a political point; and, attacking a drug company for being responsible.

Sept. 14, 2005

     The media continue to be dominated by news of Katrina. Despite the minimal broadcast coverage of business efforts to aid disaster victims, ABC showed why businesses often respond more rapidly than government. The “CBS Evening News” slipped predictions for climate catastrophe into a piece on how the Dutch have protected their nation from flooding. Lastly, “60 Minutes” proved that drug companies are always in the wrong in the eyes of the media, even when they act responsibly.

The Good
     Media coverage of what businesses are doing to aid Katrina victims has been scarce. When a network, like ABC, does a good job on this important topic, it deserves credit. “Good Morning America” reporter Mike Von Fremd profiled what Waffle House was doing to aid its community and its employees. The business that was “famous for its grits and hash browns” showed its grit in a time of crisis. Waffle House showed how rapidly private businesses can respond to a crisis and why government isn’t always the solution.

The Bad
     Viewers for the September 9 “CBS Evening News” got anything but a Dutch treat. Reporter Mark Phillips analyzed the Dutch method for dealing with flooding, roughly 50 years after that nation’s incredible flood. Unfortunately, rather than just delivering an informative report, Phillips made the connection to global warming: “With climate change, rising sea levels and more severe storms in the future, the Dutch think they'll have to close this barrier every three or four years.”

     Phillips was just the latest example of news people trying to link climate change to a major weather tragedy.

The Ugly
     The drug industry is under almost constant attack for marketing drugs the media consider to be unsafe. So when a company like Amgen took a cautious approach to a new cure, what did CBS do? They attacked Amgen, saying, “Imagine the anguish if the company that made the medication took it away from you?”

     That’s how Lesley Stahl handled cautious business practices on the September 11 edition of “60 Minutes.” Rather than accepting that the company was being responsible, Stahl repeatedly asked why the patients couldn’t have the drug if they agreed not to sue. However, she neglected the obvious point that the patients were already suing despite their contracts with Amgen that said the firm could act exactly as it did.


The Good, the Bad and the Ugly tracks the best and worst media coverage of business and economics. Readers are invited to submit suggestions or news tips to Director Dan Gainor at dgainor@mediaresearch.org.