(please forgive me Jim, but this is only an example)
If some reporter or even a govt. bigwig had been reporting on Tuesday about our areas beaches and the amount of tarballs on them this past Sunday they may say there were only a few or none at all. Depends on what beach they were looking at. If they did not ask a resident who was at all beaches on Sunday or they did not look at all beaches on Sunday, that report would be a secondary source. The resident who was at all and saw the different amounts of even lack of tarballs would be the primary. If the 'reporter or big wig' were wanting to downplay the numbers and effects, they could easily skew the report. Primary or secondary----consider the source and the agenda of the one telling the tale. Believe me, this event is every bit as political as the late war. The reports are going to show that and when it's over (if ever) it should not shed very kind light on the government response. That's from a primary source.
We are living it. If it's written by one with a vested interest in government, it's going to read differently.
In every major event, be it battle, hurricane, football game, the one doing a write up on them can make the report go the direction they wish. Read reports from many and then pick a place in the middle and it probably would be more accurate.
Pam