MAYHEM, mastermind, manhunt. This is how the emergency services define the initial public and media response to natural and man-made disasters.

We've seen it countless times on TV. First the chaos and confusion at the scene of the catastrophe. But help is at hand. Whistled up from nowhere, sitting on the studio sofa, we have the expert. With a mixture of guesswork and gravitas, he tells us how it all happened and should have been prevented.

Then last, what we've all been waiting for, the one blood sport they'll never ban. The hunt for someone to blame.

This is not going to be Mallon versus the media. The media has a hugely difficult task in seeking, sifting and interpreting a mass of information that is often complex and contradictory and getting it ready by deadline for an audience that wants simple truths.

Increasingly too, fed on a continuous diet of adversarial interviews conducted by the likes of John Humphreys and Jeremy Paxman - the BBC's Always Righteous Brothers - the public wants to know who was at fault and when their heads will roll.

I have become aware of the growing blame culture through my involvement with local government, a perennial Aunt Sally for the pundits.

Councils can get it wrong - I know that. Sometimes that is because of human error. Often, it is because we cannot keep pace with the expectations people have of us. Our consumer-led culture has made people more demanding. The days of "one-size fits all" services are over.

Finally, there are times when councils, and many other agencies face problems so awful, situations so incapable of resolution that however hard we try, we will not succeed. That is because we often deal with people whose lives have been damaged irreparably, sometimes by fate, sometimes by external forces, and sometimes most sadly by themselves.

I think the case of the young boy Adam Rickwood, who hanged himself in a secure unit, typifies this kind of intractable problem.

The report in this newspaper told me everything I needed to know about the perceived human and systems failures at the remand centre that made this an avoidable catastrophe. But it told me nothing of the real tragedy, namely why this 14 year-old boy had to be locked away in the first place.

It did not explain what had changed the neat, smiling child pictured on the front page to a violent drug user at odds with the world and finally with himself.

He was fourteen. Say that word to yourself a few times, then think of yourself at that age. You probably went through the usual adolescent growing pains, but I would be surprised if you didn't think the world was an amazing place, full of boundless possibilities. I know that I did. But for Adam Rickwood, it had nothing to offer. Tragically, there are a lot more young people like him.

The reviews and recommendations arising from the inquiry into his death are sensible. They will contribute to an improved youth justice system. But we should not delude ourselves that they guarantee that this awful situation will never happen again.

I wrote a few weeks back about how the media has changed from a reporter of events to a shaper of outcomes. The phenomenon of 24-hour news means that media attention - or intrusion - is now constant.

In these circumstances, the pressure to deliver soundbites rather than solutions is greater than ever. It makes for good headlines, but bad government.

I believe the media's prime role - to investigate and explain - is hugely important. It would be a shame if it turned into one of "seek and destroy." In their turn, they would argue legitimately for greater honesty and transparency from public bodies. Again, that is something we must deliver.

That would lead to a much healthier basis for public debate. It might eventually lead to a situation where we accept that to some questions there are no easy answers; and sometimes, no answers at all.