The ePodunk map, published just days after Katrina, was intended to show immediate rather than final destinations of people fleeing the storm. We say so, not only by including the date of publication, but by noting that the source of our data was emergency postings on Internet safe lists, and by describing these points as "immediate destinations." While such postings required an Internet connection, it should be noted that many were made from emergency shelters where Web access was made available.

The author [of the letter to the editor] misread our statistic about destroyed homes; we did in fact say people not houses. That said, our figure was high and we should have revised it before now. We have corrected the text.

I conceived of the map and crunched the data. As a veteran journalist with 29 years of experience and a host of investigative journalism awards, I would of course take offense at any suggestion that I "understand very little about how to apply good research skills."

Clearly, there's a difference between real-time research (that snapshot of history called "news") and retroactive study.

Since our publication of the map on Sept. 15, more in-depth information has become available. The New York Times, for example, later printed a similar map based on FEMA assistance filings. I'm sure academics will be delving into the diaspora demographics for decades to come.

We could have held off until more information was at hand. But we felt there was value in tracking the diaspora as it was happening, in its earliest stages. We took a snapshot based on a broad survey, and derived a meaningful graphic that showed the storm's nationwide impact.

Laurie Bennett

ePodunk - Celebrating the power of place