Journalistic inaccuracy

[aiglon]

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 :confused:

Aiglon

[Circuit Basher]

I'm extremely used to lournalistic inccuracy - frequently submit written reports on things which our Air Cadet Sqn get up to with piccies, but they still manage to mis-spell names, change facts, etc. I genuinely believe most journos to be thick as poo OR incapable of recognising the difference between fact and fiction OR unable to resist tampering with something which reads perfectly OK and introducing errors that way.

Sorry to offend any journos out there (and I'm sure there are some good ones), but the above is just based on personal experience.

[bcfc]

Having worked in the industry, there are some really good journos out there...unfortunately, they're all propping up the bar at the Punch or St Brides Tavern (showing my age!) and left the cubs to do the work.

On the rare occasion that something is in the paper that I have first hand experience of, every single time there had been mistakes, inaccuracies or down-right lies. All it achieves is make be disbelieve every other article and I have now stopped buying newspapers.

I use the TV news and BBCi for my news, but with the reporting from this weekend, I'll even have to review this.

[QNH 1013]

I think some reporters really can't tell fact from fiction after a while because as they hear information, their brain is mentally transcribing this into the way in which they will write it up; usually in a much more exciting way than the original.
This was brought home to me once when I had spoken at a meeting for local businesses hosted by the local newspaper. Later in the question and answer session, their senior business reporter tried to quote something I had said. Unfortunately, he changed the phrase "the first thing I do", into "the only thing I do" which in context was much more dramatic. Fortunately there were plenty of others in the room to correct him, but it was clear that he had made this mental transition of words, and honestly couldn't remember the (correct) original phrase.
If your working life is spent trying to make the routine sound exciting, then I suppose it is inevitable that you will eventually become unable to report the original information correctly.

[Aerohack]

The BBC gaff about ‘three killed in crash of two-seat aircraft’ was a silly mistake that a first-week trainee reporter with GCSE English Language should have caught. But it was the inaccuracy of ‘two-seat’ bit that really bothered me. Imagine if you’d had a loved one who was known to have been flying a two-seat aeroplane in the Oxford area on Saturday, and been unable to contact that person for a few hours after the news was posted.

I recall an accident a couple of years ago in which a light aircraft suffered an inflight structural failure. Initial reports named it as a ‘Robin 400’. An enterprising journalist from a Sunday national downloaded the names and addresses of registered owners of DR 400s from the CAA G-INFO website, and began phoning their homes, enquiring of their families if their husbands/wives/parents/children were home safe. Insensitive at best, but as it transpired the aircraft involved was a Rockwell Commander, and a few families of Robin owners were caused quite unnecessary anguish through someone’s failure to check facts before launching into print or broadcast.

As for the generally lamentable standards of national press reporting on aviation matters, I believe at least some of the fault lies in the disappearance of specialist air correspondents from the staffs of newspapers and TV stations — people of the calibre of Raymond Baxter and Reg Turnhill at the BBC, for example. That, and the ever-growing desire to seek cause and apportion blame before the wreckage has even cooled, and that applies equally to road, rail and shipping accidents.

What to do about it? Many years ago the now defunct U.S. Aviation/Space Writers Association, of which I was UK Chapter secretary, used to send out to newsdesks a useful little booklet entitled ‘The Reporter and Air Accidents’. Not only did it contain much background about aeroplanes and flying (for example, explaining that stalling an aircraft and stalling the engine in your car are not the same thing), but it contained extensive lists of contacts who could be called for informed comment. I’m not aware that there has ever been a UK equivalent, but at national press level I do see an opportunity here for the GA representative organisations to become more pro-active.

Locally, it’s not a bad idea for flying clubs to hold a Press day and offer local journalists a trial flight, so they can learn a little about private flying. Yes, you may get a ‘Biggles derring-do’ type of story, but it’ll probably be positive, and next time an incident occurs the reporter may think twice — or better still check with someone — before writing about pilots being seen ‘fighting the controls’ or ‘crashing after the engine stalled’.

[IO540]

Never let facts get in the way of a good alarmist storyline, or a lack of basic education or intelligence.

Whenever I see one of these reports stating something like "the aircraft crash landed within yards of a packed beach" or whatever, I always write to the author of this junk and explain to him that

it was a FORCED LANDING and one trains for those

the beach was empty

etc

and if we all did that every time some rag prints this stuff, there just might be a little less of it.