In the wake of our coverage of Sovereign Deed, we wondered whether traditional media would sit up and pay attention to this story. Would they look deeper into the underlying issues and into the people involved? Would their work encourage greater accountability and reporting transparency for constituents? Here’s what the media has reported so far; what do you think?
AP: Michigan town split over disaster firm
“The proposal is stirring debate in Emmet County, about 270 miles north of Detroit. Skeptics wonder whether “disaster capitalism” represents a step toward a society where ability to pay will determine who gets help during emergencies.”
Jack Lessenbury’s commentary on MPR
Jack says, “Sovereign Deed’s entire premise is this: In the event of a disaster, some lives are worth more than others, so we are here to save the truly deserving: The rich. This is a company founded on the principle of billionaires first, poor women and children last. It wants people to think that our government is incompetent to save us, and that they need to buy protection. What I worry about is that if we encourage businesses like Sovereign Deed, their advertising slogan will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If well-off people buy their own services, that will give Congress every incentive to reduce disaster funding for the rest of us.”
County’s Secrecy Agreement with Firm Draws Fire
“Company’s business plan, founder’s past also raise questions,” reports Glenn Puit of Great Lakes Bulletin News Service via Michigan Land Use Institute.
Is Survival Only for The Rich?
Anne Stanton at Northern Express asks this question in regards to Sovereign Deed’s business model.
Photo source: Pellston Airport