02-12-2015, 08:51 AM
It seems like a good idea to let media into the lava flow area. Reporters go into war zones after all.
CBS News broadcast footage from an area with moving lava and burning trees, but local reporters were kept out. Clearly the law didn't work in that instance, and unless I'm mistaken, CBS faced no charges.
So what does the county have to gain by restricting the media from the lava flow?
Let's take the transfer station as an example. With the information provided, we accepted that it would be a $4 million loss. But what if a reporter saw something HVO or CofH didn't notice? What if that reporter or a reader then suggests some minor, inexpensive abatement measures might save taxpayers $4 million, and allow them to use the facility as intended after a brief closure? Wouldn't that make the county appear wasteful? Unresponsive? Risk averse? Elected officials wouldn't want voters to think that.
Now granted, no one (including myself) knows were the lava flow will go from one day to the next. So if the example of saving the transfer station had been successful, there clearly would be a large measure of luck involved in the plan.
But at least if you try something, you might make your own luck.
Mr. Lee had an idea that never occurred to the county.
His neighbor successfully built a road over slightly cooled lava that the county didn't consider possible.
We need more ideas like that, and the media can disseminate information to people who are creative, who build things, and get the job done because they have to.
CBS News broadcast footage from an area with moving lava and burning trees, but local reporters were kept out. Clearly the law didn't work in that instance, and unless I'm mistaken, CBS faced no charges.
So what does the county have to gain by restricting the media from the lava flow?
Let's take the transfer station as an example. With the information provided, we accepted that it would be a $4 million loss. But what if a reporter saw something HVO or CofH didn't notice? What if that reporter or a reader then suggests some minor, inexpensive abatement measures might save taxpayers $4 million, and allow them to use the facility as intended after a brief closure? Wouldn't that make the county appear wasteful? Unresponsive? Risk averse? Elected officials wouldn't want voters to think that.
Now granted, no one (including myself) knows were the lava flow will go from one day to the next. So if the example of saving the transfer station had been successful, there clearly would be a large measure of luck involved in the plan.
But at least if you try something, you might make your own luck.
Mr. Lee had an idea that never occurred to the county.
His neighbor successfully built a road over slightly cooled lava that the county didn't consider possible.
We need more ideas like that, and the media can disseminate information to people who are creative, who build things, and get the job done because they have to.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves