Laying blame : print media coverage of the 1993 flood

The focus of the media impacts the public's collective view of natural disasters and, in turn, may have far-reaching implications for policy for-mation regarding hazard mitigation and aid for victims. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare, through content analysis, print media coverage of the "Great Flood" of 1993, focus-ing on blame attributed to people or policies that may affect local and national flood policies. The publications studied were the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Des Moines Register, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, U.S. News & World Report, Time, and Newsweek. Coverage of the flood was dramatic and concentrated on immediate events more than on issues related to hazard mitigation. However, jour-nalists included a variety of issues that may have long-term impacts on how we prepare for future flooding disasters. The majority of blame generally targeted God or nature, as expected. Other frequent attributions of blame targeted the extensive levee system on the Mississippi River and its tributaries that constricts water flow and can compound flood problems; the patchwork nature of the public- and private-ly-built levee system; and the fact that the Midwestern floodplains are ex-tensively developed. A variety of sources were found to attribute blame: meteorologists, engineers and flood-control specialists, conservationists, federal and local officials, and Midwestern residents. Journalists often used sources, especially those in science professions, to elucidate key flood-control issues. The treatment of blame and the use of sources was similar in some of the publications, yet remarkably different in others. The differences found underscore the variability of media coverage and the importance of thorough, thoughtful reporting of events and issues that impact public policy formation.