'I do try not to judge people until I meet them but I do feel that ALL journalists are the same - full of rubbish'.
Really. I'm a journalist and the one thing that annoys me when I visit this website is the constant derogatory referrals to other members of my profession.
Yes - there are certain daily newspapers which write stories in an unjutifiably sensationalist way.
However, most of us want to file stories which are accurate in both the factual and grammatical sense.
Grammar and punctuation are of course our responsibility but when it comes to factual accuracy we are frequently at the mercy of those appointed to provide us with information.
If someone gave me a tip off that an airliner had returned to an airport because of cabin fumes my two main sources would be the airport's press office and whoever the airline concerned has appointed to deal with press inquiries.
This may be their own press officer or as is often the case a public relations company operating under contract.
If these people tell me the aircraft involved was an EMB 145 why on earth would I write 'BAe 146'?
The answer is I wouldn't. So if an aviation story of this type refers to the wrong make of plane it's likely the journalist is accurately reporting inaccurate information supplied by the airline's own spokesperson.
Generally, this problem is going to get worst. When my career began press officers were normally people who had worked as journalists, had a good knowledge of news outlets and understood the importance of accuracy.
Very often they moved to a press officer position because it allowed them to work in a field in which they had a particular interest.
In those days an airline press officer would probably be someone who had a strong interest in civil aviation.
Nowadays, an airline may well employ a
PR company to deal with the press.
The people employed by these companies may have degrees and certificates lining their walls but most of them will never have worked as journalists and are also having to deal with inquiries about a number of their clients at once.
Under these circumstances inaccurate information is always a possibility.
As I said earlier some newspapers - and we all know which ones - do indulge in sensationalist reporting.
Very often this has nothing to do with the reporters. They supply perfectly accurate stories which are transformed by sub-editors into something which they believe will sell more copies.
However, in some cases journalists are accused of sensationalism when they are accurately reporting what they are told.
If several passengers on an airliner which experienced problems told me their lives had flashed before them and people had prayed as the drama unfolded why wouldn't I include this in a story?
An introductory paragraph such as 'Passengers on a flight which experienced engine failure immediately after take-off from Belfast City Airport have described how people prayed as the Pilot and First Officer did everything in their power to return the aircraft safely to the ground' is perfectly legitimate if that's what happened.
A quote such as: "There was a bang and the plane lurched to the side. My life flashed before my eyes" is also perfectly legitimate as long as it's an accurate verbatim report of something said by someone on the aircraft.
As a final point could I say that in my experience spokespeople appointed by airlines do play incidents down when possible.
I can think of one during the past two years where it was hard to believe the airline's statement in its immediate aftermath and the Civil Aviation Authority's official report some time later referred to the same aircraft at the same time on the same day.
In this case it was the CAA who referred to frightened passengers and alarming movements by the aircraft.