Coverage of sports, courts and people who feel out of sorts

Odds and ends:

Again, we find ourselves looking for that perfect space between Chicken Little and Pollyanna, between outright panic and unbridled optimism. No, I'm not talking about the Cubs' race for glory. It's the new swine flu scare we're wrangling with now.

For an entry in his Animal Farm blog at dailyherald.com, Senior State Government Editor John Patterson tracked down some government commercials from the 1970s urging Americans to get swine flu shots in advance of the epidemic then expected to sweep the country and the world. In the bright light of history - knowing what a massive false alarm that scare proved to be - the spots now seem quaint and almost silly. As this new threat looms, that unrealized threat - and others that have come and gone in the 30 years since - is never far from our editors' minds as we examine what swine flu stories to write and where to play them.

At the same time, we can't ignore the tremendous potential for disaster that exists. It's clearly unwise for the media - as it is for the government or for you, for that matter - to wait until evidence of a disastrous spread of the disease arises to begin earnestly following the topic. The risk of overreaction is less dangerous than the risk of indifference.

A torrent of stories about the hundred or so Americans so far confirmed to have contracted the swine flu virus in a population of 300 million may seem a bit overblown, but that may also be the price of safety. In this case, it's far better to be prepared for a calamity that doesn't occur than to be unprepared for one that does.

For all that, the threat gives us an opportunity to revisit our national and local state of preparation for the possibility of a major epidemic. It's useful to read stories that show local hospitals and public health agencies going to their "battle stations," as it were, to brace for a possible onslaught of stricken patients. It gives us a chance to see whether current plans are adequate - and to wonder how, considering the yearslong gear-up for the so-far-absent avian flu assault, we could not be better prepared.

Now, as for the Cubs ... I'll only say the season is early. As a White Sox fan, I've somewhat enjoyed observing the gnashing of teeth on the North Side as the team hovers around the .500 mark fewer than 20 games into the season. It doesn't seem that long ago that a .500 season was a Cubs fan's standard of excellence. Snide observations notwithstanding, it's remarkable from a newspaper's point of view to contemplate what we have to cover in Chicago this year - two of our major sports teams are in exciting playoffs at this very moment, and our baseball, football and soccer franchises all likewise are in contention to make playoff, if not championship, runs. For all the glum news on the economic and health fronts, it is a wonderful time to read the sports pages.

Our editorial on this page says it well enough and staff writer Christy Gutowski's story earlier this week illuminated the point well, too, but it still bears repeating: It is not media access to the courts that's at issue in sensitive trials it's the public's access. The media can be faulted for many shortcomings and even occasional abuses in the coverage of sensational court stories, but remove them from the process and we have no way to monitor whether our courts are giving equal opportunities for justice to the poor and the rich, protecting the rights of the innocent or administering fair punishment of the guilty.

Justice is supposed to be blind. But that can't happen if the rest of us are forbidden to see.

Jim Slusher, jslusher@dailyherald.com, is an assistant managing editor at the Daily Herald.