This analysis piece critiques "helicopter journalism", described by author Danny Schechter as "distanced 'outside-in' reporting that accesses few if any sources in the country itself, does not speak the language, and does not explain much about what is going on. It's like the foreign correspondent who flies into a conflict zone for an afternoon and gets most of his information from a taxi driver."

Reflecting on media reports from the December 2004 tsunami disaster in South East Asia, Schechter raises a number of questions about the media's strategy for sharing information in, and raising awareness about, emergencies and crises, including:

• "Why is it so hard for western news organizations to connect with local journalists who often know the story best?"
• "We have heard about all the money that is being raised, but where is it going and how should it be spent?"
• "What do the people who know the most about delivering aid have to say"?
• "Who is thinking about longer-term reconstruction? And what are they planning?"
• What about organizations in Indonesia who know the country best, groups like United in Diversity. Why not give their thoughts and actions more visibility?"
• What is the relationship between the so called "core countries" designated from afar by President Bush to lead the Aid effort and the UN which will coordinate most of the international involvement?"
• How about some background on the US history with Indonesia dating back to Washington's support for the dictator Suharto and Indonesia's invasion of East Timor"?

Schechter's conclusion: "As the crisis deepens, the journalism has not."