Bit of an old chestnut, I know, but why do journos find it so difficult to get simple facts correct? The recent tragedy at Oxford is a classic example. Initially, some reports (I understand) had the aircraft as a two seater - despite also saying there were three people killed
The BBC web site this morning is suggesting that the aircraft "appeared to loop" - none of the witness quotes I have seen reported anywhere suggest anything like a "loop". The Times this morning says that the wreckage will today be removed "from the runway" at Oxford - so who moved it there from the crash site in the first place?
I realise journalists are alwaya up against deadlines but, please, these are simple, straightforward facts. OK, the one about looping could possible be put down to a desire to sensationalise the story but the Times reporter must have spoken to somebody in the know in order to find out that the wreckage was going to be removed (assuming even that bit is accurate) so why not also check where it is to start with
Aiglon