It's not that, it's the fact that he isn't even a very good journalist... he is overtly sensationalist just look at his interview for Air Crash Investigation regarding Garuda, he was completely sensationalist and I know it's a small thing but I just HATE how he always says the "plane" did this or the "plane" did that... no one who is serious in the industry calls it a 'plane' that is a childish term that is bandied about by the media and by people who don't know anything about aviation... an aeroplane, airplane or aircraft is what most knowledgeable people say. Is that the end of the world??? No, it's not but those sort of subtle signs show he really knows nothing at all and I and am sure, many others are sick to death of him sticking his face on TV and carrying on like he's an expert. I find Peter Harbison (not sure of the spelling) similarly annoying. I remember him saying once that "If Qantas had not created Jetstar, Virgin would have torn them to pieces" - really, a company with $4.5bn dollars cash in the bank at the time versus a company that narrowly avoided folding and only survived because AN collapsed could have killed Qantas. No. Qantas would have just undercut them to the point they went out of business. These people are held up as experts. It doesn't mean any of the rest of us are journalist types but many people on here would be capable of providing much better commentary and balanced as well and not using every opportunity on camera to big note and advance themselves only because their audience doesn't know any better.