Sometimes it's almost a little embarrassing being a member of the media.

Media types are supposed to be skeptics, cynics and critics. We pride ourselves on being the "Fourth Estate." We're the watchdogs.

But in the aftermath of the hurricane known as Katrina, I am wondering what in the world happened to us.

I say "us" because I was taken in, too.

Here's an excerpt from my Katrina column the Saturday after the hurricane struck.

"By the end of the week, the desperate nature of the situation became more evident.

"I-10 took on the look of a highway in a third-world country with dead bodies along the road.

"There were shots fired at would-be rescuers. A National Guard helicopter drew fire, as did volunteer rescuers who took boats to the scene.

"There were numerous reports of rampant lawlessness - looting, rapes, murder - throughout the town.

"Rescuers had to abandon their humanitarian mission in an attempt to restore order."

And I wrote this:

"Some are saying it could take years to pump out the water after the levees are repaired.

"Some are saying New Orleans will be uninhabitable for up to five years."

OK, now most of that turned out to be unadulterated hogwash.

My "sources" of course, were national TV media - the "experts" on CNN and Fox News, et. al.

This really annoys me for two reasons:

First, because I should have known better than to trust the national media.

Second, because the national media, apparently, can't be trusted.

Think about how much of what was reported to us in the days after Katrina turned out to be just plain wrong.

It was crazy.

CNN claimed snipers were taking potshots at helicopters trying to evacuate patients from hospitals. CNN's Paula Zahn broadcast reports of 'bands of rapists, going block to block.'

Geraldo Rivera, on Fox, became part of the story. He was crying on the air and reporting, "Yesterday the sun set on a scene of terror, chaos, confusion, anarchy, violence, rapes, murders, dead babies, dead people."

Go, Geraldo, go.

Great stuff, except it was mostly false.

Even the venerable Editor & Publisher, the trade magazine we all revere in this business, ran an article with this headline: 'Mortuary Director Tells Local Paper 40,000 Could Be Lost in Hurricane.'

The hysteria even went into print internationally with a French newspaper reporting that 1,200 people drowned in a single school.

And Associated Press pretty much parroted the TV coverage.

Of course, a lot of this was driven by Louisiana Mayor Ray Nagin, who appeared to be kind of nutty at times. But I'll forgive him - his whole city was flooded.

Here's a Nagin quote: 'They have people standing out there, have been in that frickin' Superdome for five days watching dead bodies, watching hooligans killing people, raping people.'

The New Orleans police chief, Eddie Compass, said little babies were getting raped.

Now, I understand the propensity to exaggerate in situations like these.

It was, after all, the worst natural disaster ever in this country.

So I get why people like Nagin, under huge amounts of stress, might lose it a little bit and say something off the hook.

But the media?

No excuse.

The media are supposed to check this stuff out. The media are supposed to be sure stuff is accurate before they put it in the public eye.

They didn't. Not even close. They all ran with a bunch of rumor and innuendo and I, frankly, got taken in.

I ran with it, too.

Looking back, I think I know why things got so whacky with the media during Katrina.

It's the competitive nature of the news. It wasn't always like that.

Back in the good old days, when there were three networks and three news anchors, there wasn't the same level of competition.

These days, TV news is all about ratings.

Cable channels run news 24/7. Network news producers scramble to play catch up.

Everybody in the TV news business wants to be first with a "breaking" story.

If you're first enough times, you get the reputation as being the one to watch.

Then you get the ratings.

Well, if you want to be first, you really don't have a lot of time to check things out, now do you? No, you don't. You just run with it.

And that's precisely what the TV news people did. And everybody else - including me - bought into it.

One might think the phenomenon is harmless. One would be wrong.

There can be serious consequences.

In New Orleans, for example, all the inaccurate reports of violence, rape and death forced the first National Guard units to enter the city in combat mode, wearing body armor in stifling heat for no reason.

They eventually switched over to rescue mode, but precious time was wasted.

Nagin ordered the cops to stop search and rescue efforts so they could root out roving bands of rapist/killers that didn't exist.

Efforts to evacuate patients from a hospital were halted because of falsely reported sniper fire at helicopters.

Same thing at the Superdome, where rescue efforts were halted by unconfirmed and unsubstantiated reports of gunfire on helicopters.

So yeah, there are serious consequences to sensational, inaccurate reporting.

And isn't it odd how there has been no outcry, explanation or apologies? Everybody's just mum on the subject. That's strange.

Long-time columnist James J. Kilpatrick used to say, "If your mother says she loves you, check it out."

That would be good advice for today's legions of talking heads. TV news people need to check out their sources.

As for me, a quote from the movie "Animal House" comes to mind. Essentially, the media are telling me, "Face it. You screwed up. You trusted us." [[In-content Ad]]