Both,
Slippery_Pete, and that should not only be obvious, but really easy to understand.
When speaking from the point of view of a Qantas passenger, he would say that he likes the idea of his pilots being the best paid in the world. Who wouldn't?
When reporting on the ails of Qantas, he will say it is because their costs are way higher than their competitors - which is exactly the situation, so he is telling it exactly like it is.
You seem to think that he can't say both of these things - but that is the logic of a child. Of course he can say both!
You seem to think that because he is of the view that Qantas must cut its costs, he personally *wants* the aircraft to be maintained overseas.
If you could ask him where he would prefer the aircraft to be maintained,
from the Qantas passenger's point of view, he would say Australia. And who wouldn't?
However the news is a little different.
allthecoolnamesarego, that is probably true on the planet where you live, but on this planet, where we have GT, the news has to be entertaining. You are just not grasping this reality. The aviation expert, whoever he is, just cannot give the "we don't know ... we will have to wait for the final report" answers. If he does, he will not be invited back and will cease to be labelled an "expert". This is true not just of commercial TV but ABC and SBS as well!
You know there doesn't have to be a difference between someone who "sounds like they know what they are talking about" and someone "who knows what they are talking about".
Sure, but where is that person of the latter category? Why aren't we seeing him on the telly instead of GT? He has had years now to come forward and supplant GT. I wonder where he is?
... of course he would know that 'absolutely' was the wrong word to use.
How do you know that the SAR expert he was speaking to, just prior to going on air, didn't use the word "absolutely"? You think he should only use "absolutely" if he personally was in the ocean, inspecting the debris? That is ridiculous.
As someone with a SAR background, I can categorically tell you that anything that *might* be of interest will be investigated.
Well you are categorically speaking rubbish then - because there can be an enormous, enormous cost involved. A cost so enormous that it is just not practical to retrieve 100% of the satellite-observed debris so as to investigate it all. I will cut you some slack on this statement as you did admit to having a few reds!