Lets put it this way. You go to an organization with 100 people. 95 of the people are happy, 5 are not. You interview all 100 people, but you write your article based entirely on what the 5 unhappy people said, leaving out what the 95 happy people told you. Do you think the result will be an accurate representation? If the idea is to write an article critical of Boeing and the FAA management, it's simple to leave out anything that doesn't support that position. In fact, that's exactly what passes for journalism these days, and the NYT has shown themselves to be particularly adept at that.
Agreed! What's far worse is that the media is focusing on two 737s that fell out of the sky at high speed and killed all their occupants, rather than the thousands of 737s that fly multiple sectors safely every day.
//SARC OFF
News is the not normal, or the not-normal-until-now, by definition. And we're not just talking about employees grousing because the Keurig is on the blink, or even people who think that the safety culture is not working, but people who feel that way so strongly that they will put their careers at risk. The correct number of such people in a commercial airplane company is zero.