Press gets it wrong again

[TonyC]

Here it is Tony-

http://www.newsday.com/news/correct...c05,0,4778391.story?coll=ny-corrections-print

Thanks JJay... It seems like it'd be easier to keep things up to date on their website if they put all the corrections in one place... but wait, then they couldn't have so many different versions of the news at the same time... hmmmm

 

[WrightAvia]

The media is dumb and so are the sheeples.

How do you think I feel when one of my coworkers comes up to me and says, "Bill, the chief pilot of a charter operation who is an ex-cop, says that full auto Uzi's are illegal and so are the semi auto ones."

Bill, the ex-cop and chief pilot of a charter operation doesn't know dick. And he isn't even a media guy.

Bias is where you find it and stupid people are everywhere.

 

[Flying Illini]

good idea! I think Honda has already beat you to the punch, though...

LOL!
My thoughts exactly, flywithastick!!http://images.automotive.com/stock/300/HONDA/ELEMENT/2003/5OD.jpg[/URL]

 

[captainv]

Wow, great to see the correction, i'm impressed. my opinion of that paper just went up a notch. guess what - they do read letters to the editor.

can't go at length here, it's early and i've got to leave for a 4-day.

but bottom line - the media does make mistakes, especially in something as technical and foreign as aviation to a reporter who spends most of their time specializing in something else.

a few papers might be lucky enough to have a pilot on staff or someone who likes aviation topics (you should read Bill Adair in the St. Pete Times sometime, he wrote a book about the 737 rudder PCUs and the Pittsburgh crash.)

i spent my 4 years correcting basic facts in stories about aviation, from reporters who are extremely intelligent, overworked, underpaid, etc... If this reporter had all day to work on a single story, my respect for her paper would go up again - most juggle several stories a day on completely different topics.

journalists are supposed to know a little bit about everything and be an expert in nothing (at least at the local level). trust me, they can write at a high level. i use the 8th-grade example because, for the most part, the readers haven't cracked any vocabulary books in a while. did i ever mention the top 3 things my readers went for in my paper? Obituaries, sports, comics, in that order.

i never meant to imply that her errors were ok, but that i can understand why she and the editor didn't catch them. just trying to paint a picture of how challenging it can be on the other side of the newspaper, that's all.

btw, don't get me started about TV news. you should've heard the crap i heard on the 11 p.m. news when a King Air went down south of Atlanta.the other night. AJC did a nice job though....

 

[TonyC]

you should've heard the crap i heard on the 11 p.m. news when a King Air went down south of Atlanta.the other night. AJC did a nice job though....

You mean in this story, 2 Die in Crash, AJC Reporters Determine Cause, where 4 staff writers and a staff researcher combine all their resources to reveal the cause of the crash just hours after the wreckage cools?


"A pilot trying to beat bad weather died along with a second occupant when their plane crashed while trying to land at Newnan-Coweta Airport on Thursday night.

"Coweta County Sheriff Mike Yeager said the pilot, believed to be a Coweta County man, radioed the airport telling them he was coming in for a landing. The Federal Aviation Administration offficials lost track of the plane about 1000 feet in the air, Yeager said.

" 'He was coming in and having a hard time navigating,' Yeager said. "

He shouldn't have been "trying to beat the weather," I guess. Fortunately, they found a Sheriff who knows everything about aviation since he appears to be related to ole Chuck Yeager, yanno.

 

[Flying Illini]

Regardless of how many stories reporters are juggling a day, it is the reporters responsibility to obtain all the facts and to write an educated article. Since many people in the population get their GA (and many other topics) knowledge from what they read in newspapers the reporters HAVE to get their stories right the first time. I bet that very few people read the corrections column, I know it's not a habit for me. When things like this make the news many of my non-pilot friends will ask me about it. They rehash what they read/heard and I have to tear the story apart and explain it properly. Those friends then go away with a much more positive (usually) opinion of GA. Now imagine the millions of people out there who DON'T have any pilot-friends and therefore they are unable to discuss the incident and get the real story. They now have a wrongfully negative opinion about GA due to an incompetent <sp?> reporter and editor. This is unacceptable! I believe that this is one of the main reasons that people have such fear of "little airplanes." They don't understand them and the newspapers help perpetuate the problem. The uneducated writing and jumping to conclusions has GOT to stop.
I lived next to a journalism student for 2 years and I lived with him for another 2 years. During that time I got to see how the "other side" works. Integrity was always stressed to him. Never submit an article without ALL of the research finished. He told me that the hardest part of reporting was the researching. He had to write on MANY topics and he needed to be familiar with ALL of them. Nothing just off the top of your head. Even if he wasn't interested in a story assigned to him, he still worked hard to get the whole story as well as doing his research. This makes the stories easier to read and understand, IMO.
The general public will decide how they feel about a certain topic based on what they read and hear in the media (i.e. elections, etc) so it is the reporters' responsibility to get it right, NO MATTER WHAT!

Sorry for the rant but all the reporters have to do is speak to someone at the airport to get alot of information on aviation in general or even better, CALL an organization like the FAA, AOPA, or the NTSB.

my .02 cents.

Flying Illini

 

[sky37d]

Well, maybe, just maybe, my letter, and the one by wankel did some good.

It causes me to think that whenever the media reports on an airplane crash, we should jump on them like Marines on the Taliban, until they get the story straight. A concerted effort, by knowledgeable folks ( I do NOT include myself in that) would help journalism, the public, and everyone who flies.

Can you just see the media frenzy the first time a Mustang, or Eclipse, or Safire augers in? FAST JETS FOR INEXPERIENCED PILOTS

 

[Flying Illini]

It's gonna happen.

Maybe as pilots we should offer our services to our local newspapers as advisors/consultants. I would do that job for free just to be sure that they are publishing correct info.

 

[Wankel7]

Well it is a start I am glad they got some of the facts straight.

Wankel

 

[rettofly]

It's gonna happen.

Maybe as pilots we should offer our services to our local newspapers as advisors/consultants. I would do that job for free just to be sure that they are publishing correct info.

Been there, done that. Several cities. They didn't need my help.

 

[Flying Illini]

ANY article, written on a technical subject, such as aviation, medicine, the law, etc...written by a layperson, will seem grossly inaccurate and inadequate to someone in that particular profession, such as a pilot, a doctor or a lawyer.

It happens everyday. That's just the way it is. Why get so wrapped up over it? It certainly won't change anything. Maybe each of you critics should write an article on cardio-vascular surgery tonight, and have it ready by tomorrow. Along with everything else you have to do. Then have a thoracic surgeon critique it. I'm sure they would find it totally accurate.

I have yet to read a poorly written article on cardio-vascular surgery. And even if I did, I would be hesitant to base my opinions on that article alone due to the other well written articles I have read on the same subject. A poorly written article on a subject such as surgery would do little to cause the general population to mistrust it (surgery) b/c it is such a common thing these days and it is a topic that many people are able to discuss on an educated level. Aviation however, has VERY few well written articles concerning it and since it is something that such a small number of the population has experienced (unlike surgery...if you haven't had surgery, someone you know has) the prime source of education comes from the media...even if it is a poorly done report. If it is done poorly, the general population won't recognize that. A poorly done report on surgery however would raise a few eyebrows among many more people than just the doctors.

This aviation article was NOT a technical article. It was not a "Why airplanes fly" kinda thing. This was just a poorly written (non-technical) article about an airplane that crashed. I would not try to write a "how to perform surgery" article w/o the help of a surgeon. I would however have no problem reporting on what happens, in general, in surgery. Pull up a few article from the internet and make a few phone calls to the local hospital and viola, I've got a well informed article with good references that is fit to be published. I also wouldn't include something to the effect of "unlike gas stations, hospitals are allowed to operate all night." which has nothing to do with the story.

There is no excuse for the media to do such a poor job of reporting concerning aviation and aircraft accidents. And the other thing that's got to stop, the speculation by the media as to why a crash occurred. All of a sudden you've got X number of people (everyone who read the paper) thinking a plane crashed trying to "beat the weather in" or something to that effect.

 

[Wankel7]

Update - I got a phone call from the newspaper this morning. They said they recieved my letter and it was under consideration. They said it may appear in the, "Letters to the editior" section in the next 10 days.

Wankel

 

[sky37d]

Way cool, Wankel

 

[Tripower455]

It is this kind of reporting that has led me to question the accuracy of ANYTHING I read or hear in the mainstream media. I figure that if they are getting the most basic facts about aviation wrong enough to for the readers to come to the wrong conclusion, then the stuff that I am not familiar with must have the same level of bad info.

I've lost count of the number of times that a friend or relative has come to me asking questions about an aviation related story. Many have argued that I was wrong, because Suzy Haircut on WBS news said otherwise (I only do this for a living). Much of the stuff that's come out since 9/11 comes to mind... EG: Pretty much every non aviation person I know thinks that all airline pilots are now armed and that airport security is tight enough to prevent another 9/11.

I have yet to read a poorly written article on cardio-vascular surgery.

Me either, but then again, I know very little about cardio-vascular surgery, so the reporting might be as messed up as anything aviation wise.


IMHO, the mainstream media couldn't care less about accuracy or bias, as long as they are selling newspapers or commercial time!

 

[Wankel7]

Update part Duex -

Got this letter from the writter -

Thank you for writing. I've received numerous calls and emails regarding the article and Newsday has run a correction on one factual error (the twin engine plane that crashed two years ago was not an amateur-built plane) and a clarification on one misleading statement in the article (pilots must register their planes with the FAA.) As for commercial flights at night, I understand they may be allowed in and out of other airports around the nation, but the area near MacArthur Airport has a night sound ordinance in place, prohibiting commercial flights after 11 p.m. If there's anything else you would like to discuss about the article, please feel free to email me your comments.

Thank you,
Denise M. Bonilla