TIME’S MICHAEL GRUNWALD WINS $50,000 PRIZE FOR PREVENTIVE JOURNALISM
Topic: Prize for Preventive Journalism, The Forum, Preventive Journalism01. October 2008 |
Print This Post
|
Email This Post
|
The 2008 Prize for Preventive Journalism was awarded September 30 to Michael Grunwald of TIME Magazine for his August 2007 cover story "Why New Orleans Still Isn’t Safe." The story delves into the immense danger facing New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina and the persistent pattern of mistakes by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in devising ways to handle hurricane-generated floods in Louisiana’s largest city. Grunwald’s searching look at post-Katrina New Orleans in the balance was selected by judges Charles Peters, Bill Kovach, and Katherine Boo from among ten finalists whose work exemplifies the best in American journalism. In his acceptance speech, Grunwald shocked and delighted the gathering of journalists, editors, and open government activists by announcing he would donate the entire $50,000 prize to a charitable cause in New Orleans. Understanding Government congratulates Mike on his outstanding journalistic achievements and celebrates his generosity upon winning one of journalism’s largest prizes.
Read the press release ( 
PDF 16KB).
understandinggov.org
The only good thing about this is that the money is going to charity.
comment at 01. October 2008
I don’t agree with the first comment. It’s good– indeed, vital– that New Orleans’ continued risk be exposed; beyond this, that the Army Corps of Engineers be examined closely. As to the award being given to New Orleans charities, kudos all around.
comment at 01. October 2008
Fully deserved award. Grunwald has made it possible for America to know the extent of the harm caused by the gung ho attitude of the Army Corps of Engineers, and their ability to “cook the books” in order to do unneeded water diversion projects. Giving the money to the victims in New Orleans is further icing on his cake!
comment at 01. October 2008
I do agree with the first comment…
comment at 01. October 2008
Unimpressed? Are you freaking serious? Did you even read the article? It was well-written, forceful and downright appalling that the government continues to ignore this pressing problem. The article was well-researched and anyone who read it who says they were unimpressed has no idea what good journalism looks like. Mr. Grunwald’s decision to donate the money at a time when journalists are losing jobs by the hundreds each month is proof that we will survive.
comment at 02. October 2008
TIME magazine’s Aug. 13, 2007, cover story, “The Threatening Storm,” contains many errors and misrepresentations of facts with respect to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hurricane Katrina, and ongoing efforts to improve hurricane and storm damage reduction for southeast Louisiana.
“The misrepresentation of the situation in Louisiana by TIME magazine is damaging to efforts to get essential, factual information to the people and community leaders of New Orleans,” said Maj. Gen. Don T. Riley, Director of Civil Works for the Corps. “The article’s reckless disregard for the truth undermines the real science and risk information citizens need to make informed decisions about rebuilding.”
At TIME’s request, the Corps spent a week providing the author with interviews and detailed engineering and scientific information about what we have learned and accomplished in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The Corps also provided information about the ongoing and planned work the Corps and its partners are doing to restore and improve regional protection.
Much of the engineering and scientific information provided to TIME by the Corps was based on the work done by the independent Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force (IPET). Lt. Gen. Carl A. Strock, then the Corps commander, commissioned the IPET to analyze the performance of the hurricane protection system during Hurricane Katrina. IPET comprised more than 150 national experts from eight government agencies, 25 universities and 23 private firms. Dr. Ed Link, IPET chair, was interviewed by TIME during the preparation of the article and provided information on the hurricane threat and reliability analysis.
All IPET work was reviewed by two separate panels of national experts: the American Society of Civil Engineers’(ASCE) External Review Panel and the National Academies — National Research Council’s Committee on New Orleans Regional Hurricane Protection Projects. Their reports are available at www.asce.org and www.nationalacademies.org.
The Corps also released on July 10 the draft Hurricane Protection Decision Chronology (HPDC) for the Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Protection Project (LP&VHPP) in the Greater New Orleans area. The HPDC is an exhaustive examination of the 50-year record of LP&VHPP decision-making and project implementation involving the Corps, local sponsors, government at all levels, and the courts.
An independent study team of water resources planning and policy experts conducted the HPDC inquiry and prepared the report. The National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies externally reviewed the HPDC prior to its release.
The HPDC’s lessons learned about the complex decision processes and relationships between agencies, local sponsors and stakeholders are applicable to the development of large infrastructure projects nationwide. Key findings in the HPDC emphasize the importance of using systems approaches for public works infrastructure; adaptive management over the life of projects; the need to consider how decisions made today impact or are impacted by decisions made in the past; and the critical importance of understanding risk management and effectively communicating risk to the public and decision makers.
The HPDC also serves to emphasize the need for the Corps and other agencies to do a better job in providing critical risk information about the state of the national public works infrastructure to the nation’s decision makers that will enable them to make better-informed decisions about infrastructure priorities and funding.
TIME fails to include relevant Corps, IPET or HPDC information in the article that would give its readership the context needed to make informed decisions about the situation in southeast Louisiana. The article also does not include any of the findings of the objective national experts from the ASCE or the National Academies review panels. The article instead relies upon technical quotes that are not supported by science-based facts or the analysis done by IPET, ASCE or the National Academies.
comment at 03. October 2008
I certainly am impressed, why is everyone a hater. I work for the Lower 9th Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development, which is the recipient of Mr. Grunwald’s generosity, and this donation will make a huge contribution to our work in assisting residents of the 9th Ward.
Also, in regards to the comments by anon, you are wrong. The article doesn’t misrepresent anything. The corps made a grave mistake, and they were negligent in informing people of the faulty-ness of the levees. You say “complex relationships between agencies, local sponsors and stakeholders are applicable to the development of large infrastructure projects nationwide.” These statements are true, however we cannot excuse the fact that corps built them in an less that satisfactory manner and that they new this. While they are dependent on the Federal government to provide them with the funds to make the necessary repairs, they didn’t demand it or announce that there was a critical safety issue. Quite the opposite, they maintained that the levees were sufficient to protect residents, which is proven by the fact that the residents were told they didn’t need flood insurance because they weren’t in a flood zone because of adequate levee protection.
The federal government can use our tax dollars to bring democracy to Iraq, or to bail out wall street, but we can’t protect our most vulnerable citzens due to “complex decision processes and relationships between agencies.” I DON”T BUY IT.
comment at 21. October 2008