I’m not sure if I’m alone on this one or not, but I didn’t find out about the disaster in Japan through any kind of social media. I woke up, made coffee, and turned on the T.V. The disaster in Japan was dominating the airwaves, and I couldn’t look away. Of course, the internet was buzzing too; after watching the video news channels I decided it was high time to check out what the web was saying.
I was totally overwhelmed. Not by emotions, but by the sheer amount of information about the very recent disaster. There was so much I hardly knew where to start, but when I finally did I found it difficult to find any real consistent information. Such is the nature of disasters, it’s hard to say for sure how much death and damage actually occurred until weeks or months after, but a little consistency would have been appreciated at that point.
Then came the murmurs about the potential for nuclear disaster. I went back to the Internet and had absolutely no idea what to think. Some places were saying that the Japanese people near the nuclear reactors were in imminent danger. Other places were saying it wasn’t a big deal, and some even said not to believe other sources because they were sensationalizing the danger. Ann Coulter even said on T.V that small amounts of radiation are good for you (I think that is a ridiculous statement, but I included it just to demonstrate the variance in reports).
It was only after a few days of reading internet reports that I finally saw something that was actually helpful. It was a video done by CNN that explained, in detail, the problem with the reactor. It even had an interview with one of the men who helped design the plant in question.
As far as coverage goes, the Internet had far more information than T.V news, but it was too varied. When I finally got some good information it came from a combination of the two, which works for me.