From David Carr on NYTimes.com:
When I was in Austin, I would fall asleep each night to bad dreams, prompted by cable ranting that the world was melting down, principally in Japan. And each morning I would wake up to reporting that described in very careful detail what was actually known, not feared, about the nuclear crisis in Japan.
Got it? Cable news coverage of Japan was alarmist, the NY Times coverage is " very careful" and only about "what was actually known, not feared".
From the NY Times, March 14th
NYT NEWS ALERT: Japan Faces Prospect of Nuclear Catastrophe as Employees Leave Plant
"Nuclear catastrophe" is "very careful"??????
"Faces Prospect of Nuclear Catastrophe" is "what was actually known, not feared"????
So, we very carefully knew they faced a prospect of a catastrophe?
Or, how about these gems:
Japan Faces Potential Nuclear Disaster as Radiation Levels Rise http://nyti.ms/emBwEl
Very careful = Nuclear Disaster
Known, not feared = Potential Nuclear Disaster
On our radar: #Japan. Our latest article summarizing growing sense of disaster at #Fukushima nuclear plant: http://nyti.ms/h3hPeV
Very careful = disaster
Known, not feared = a summary of a growing sense?
And cable news is alarmist? There's a growing sense that those in glass houses that throw stones face the prospect of a broken glass catastrophe.