The critics really need to draw a distinction between the generalist journos who sometimes cover aviation and the real specialists, many of whom know their stuff, but whose work isn't seen in the Daily Mail or the Sun (nor even in the Telegraph and Times, these days).
.
Agreed, and this is what I've been trying to get across in my earlier posts. I have not criticised any individuals, merely listed a few observations about the way that generalists are obliged to work, with inevitable consequences.
It isn't relevant, for example, to say that we shouldn't read the red-tops. I don't. What started this thread running was the fact that lots of people
do, and it is the 'reality' that those readers are invited to accept that 'we' object to. But I still stick to my question about whether this is a useful debate to have? As I said earlier, let it go. In the end, dislike ill-informed reporting as we may, how much does it really matter? Let's be content in knowing what we know, and being thankful that there are many more Red 4s out there waiting to be good guys.