If the utilities are in fact not going to be compliant on Y2K. Why don't we see more media coverage on this? The only media I have seen covering this is CBN. Why don't we see something on TV from ABC, CBS or NBC?

Thanks,

Diane

-- Anonymous, November 20, 1998

Answers

Diane,

There's been coverage on all of the major networks (I've been on the Today Show on NBC and Nightline on ABC myself), but it's been spotty. ABC has ran several pieces on World News Tonight, and 60 Minutes is currently working on a piece.

Over the next couple of months, when the "Monica and Bill" soap opera finally winds down, Y2k is going to be the BIG STORY for most of 1999. So consider yourself on the leading edge of this thing! ;-)

To keep my comments at least partially focused on the electric industry, I have to agree that the CBN piece on Y2k impact to the electric industry was easily the best "hard news" reporting of the issue that I've seen. It was completely secular, no fundamentalist spin to it, and had some very topflight folks being interviewed.

-- Anonymous, November 20, 1998

Diane said: If the utilities are in fact not going to be compliant on Y2K. Why don't we see more media coverage on this?

my reply: Because it isn't directly affecting people RIGHT NOW! The possibility of our electric infrastructure (and everything else) failing due to the inability of computers to process a date properly just sounds like science fiction to most people.

Most people I've talked to are concerned about one thing when it comes to Y2K....their money. "How do I know my money is safe?" "What can I do?"(to protect my money)

The ABC Nightline show that Rick was on (for about 10 seconds), but that lasted the full half hour was broadcast on Oct 20 1998.

Here is a URL for the transcript: http://www.abcnews.com/onair/nightline/transcripts/ ntl_981020_trans.html

unfortunately the actual transcript has "expired" and you have to order it, but it has been posted on the web, if you want to read it, go to www.prepare4Y2K.com and look up NIGHTLINE on the left side of the page. (shhhhh...don't tell anyone its there)

Better yet:

If you go to the ABC address that I printed above, there is information on how to order a video of the show.

I taped it myself off the air and have made many copies and find that most that watch it start to understand.

I would recommend purchasing the tape of the show. I don't think you'll regret it. It's the only really mainstream TV news coverage that did any in-depth look at the problem.

-Jim

-- Anonymous, November 20, 1998

you know, folks, i am a very sick man. i basically *order* myself to take a break, so i leave work to come home to watch "hogan's heroes" on tvland (cable network), & i end up surfing the web while watching it, & i end up... here. i need help. okay, that's out of my system.

why isn't the media covering this? well, here are some reasons. first, the question is why is y2k overall not getting more coverage (y2k & power is a subset issue of y2k). primarily, it is just too complicated. the modern american news media is simply not set up to deal with anything of this depth. i am speaking here primarily of television, which is where most americans get their news- and there, mainly from the nightly newscasts. granted, all 3 networks have gone to "in depth" type stories once each night; however, y2k is well beyond the scope of those, at least the way the networks approach them. in network tv, the best hope is a news magazine, like 60 minutes or dateline. the print news magazines have all addressed y2k- newsweek leading the way in 1997. us news did a good short story in early june or so. time embarrassed itself, imho, with "apocalypse not" around that period as well.

again, let me come back to my main point (i'm too tired to organize this coherently): y2k is extraordinarily complicated. and if you aren't dealing with y2k on any deep basis, you won't deal with its subsets, of which power is one (along with banking/finance, manufacturing, government, international aspects, etc etc etc etc). thus, y2k is not treated as it should be (or at least i think it should be): as one global story with multiple aspects. it is, instead, treated as a group of separate stories. so the economics/business reporter deals with banks & y2k, and so on. such reporters simply don't have the time to get into the guts of y2k due to the pressures of their jobs, deadlines, etc.

now here's another point: the "mass" media is, by definition, set to appeal to a mass audience. y2k is the type of issue that one could call a "trade magazine" issue; ie, more suited for, say, pc magazine or "electric power today" (fictional example) than time magazine. i would say that in 98 it has *started* to become a mass issue, but it won't be til 99 that it hits, pardon the phrase, critical mass, in the mass media, & mass public.

another aspect to this: y2k does not easily translate to tv. it is hardly scintillating video. this makes a difference for tv types.

another: there's so much disagreement among the "experts" (and we all know- or should know- that there really is no such thing as an "expert" on y2k). reporters are generally trained to rely on "experts." well, the experts don't know, so how can reporters know? especially on the tight schedule of many reporters, who are often dealing with multiple stories and deadlines at once.

another: the time factor. 2000 is a long ways off in most folks' minds.

still another reason: predictions of y2k problems easily set one up to be lumped in with false predictions of doom from the past. and many people- including "experts"- don't want to look silly, or rather be put in the position of possibly looking silly. well, hey. that's part of the territory, sorry. if you can't take the heat, etc. look, even someone as respected as ed yardeni has been warning people about y2k for a year- and *he* gets called an "alarmist" (in a perjorative sense) or "doomsayer" by some of the brain dead. so if people less well known, and less respected, will say even something as mild as "you know, this could lead to problems," *some* people in the media will make fun of them, distort their words, etc- and that pressure is too much for them. so they clam up. i have read that some other economists on wall street's share yardeni's views, but won't say so publicly. i can't prove that, but i wouldn't be surprised if it is true.

when i saw the nightline show, one thing that really struck me was the fact that they used the same people & concepts that we had, but, of course, they're nightline and we're cbn, so i guess it's true if they say it, but not if we do (the fact that the networks often use cbn news as a video or research resource is not common knowledge).

really, though, the bottom line on y2k & the media is basically its complexity. it takes an enormous amount of time & research before you can even begin to get a handle on it.

but as The Deadline draws nearer, you'll see more and more coverage. the question is, how good will it be? my real hope is that the media doesn't either sensationalize it, or underplay it. not always an easy line to tread.

i'm exhausted- don't hold me to any of these comments :)

drew parkhill/cbn news

-- Anonymous, November 21, 1998