The slate piece kind of echoes the old Sam Kinison bit about TV coverage of natural disasters, famine, etc. "Couldn't the cameraman just give the kid a sandwich?" but there are some complex issues at play. Media coverage of disasters enables the world at large to understand what's going on and act in order to help those affected. How many readers have donated money in the past week to Haiti relief? By comparison, how many donated money in the wake of Cyclone Nargis, which killed upwards of 140,000 people in Burma in May 2008, but received far less global media coverage, owing to press resitrctions in the country?<p>One other thing to consider about the press coverage of Haiti, and other disasters: The stress on the journalists covering death and destruction can actually trigger PTSD. The Nieman report just had an entire issue devoted to stress and other issues experienced by journalists covering traumatic events or interviewing the victims of disasters and crimes. You can see it at <a href="http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reportsitem.aspx?id=101958" rel="nofollow">http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reportsitem.aspx?id=101958</a> but be forewarned, some of the content is disturbing.