PDA

View Full Version : More quality journalism


neville_nobody
1st Apr 2007, 03:04
Just pointing out more basic facts that a newspaper has gotten wrong again!! If they can't even get the aircraft type right then what else have they gotten wrong? Big difference between a 737 and a 747.

From smh.com.au

the pilots of a Garuda airliner that crashed in Indonesia, killing 21 people including 5 Australians, were arguing moments before the accident, a senior Indonesian investigator says.

Garuda Airlines Boeing 747-400 :rolleyes: caught fire after overshooting the runway at Yogyakarta airport in Indonesia on March 7.

aircraft
1st Apr 2007, 05:49
Neville,

Big deal. A waste of yours and our time - and some bandwidth.

Arm out the window
1st Apr 2007, 07:13
Not really - if they're not sure of the type they should either refer to it generically as an airliner, or do some basic fact checking and get it right! It's not that hard.

lowerlobe
1st Apr 2007, 07:53
Aircraft..I suppose calling a 737 a 747 is the same thing as not knowing what Jetstar Asia is?...........you were saying something about bandwidth !

Buster Hyman
1st Apr 2007, 08:07
Hmmm...how wide is a band?

http://www.emotihost.com/guitar.gifhttp://www.emotihost.com/harp.gifhttp://www.emotihost.com/drums.gifhttp://www.emotihost.com/piano.gif

http://www.emotihost.com/wootrock.gif

B A Lert
1st Apr 2007, 08:12
Hmmm...how wide is a band?

Six or eight files, or are they ranks? Whatever, count up when they march on Anzac Day!!

ScottyDoo
1st Apr 2007, 08:26
More bandwidth:
____http://www.emotihost.com/guitar.gif____http://www.emotihost.com/harp.gif____http://www.emotihost.com/wootrock.gif____http://www.emotihost.com/drums.gif____http://www.emotihost.com/piano.gif_____


if they're not sure of the type they should either refer to it generically as an airliner

Then everyone's going to think it's a Beech 99... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft_Model_99)

At least he didn't refer to that plane as a carpentry tool or a type of hamburger.

scrambler
1st Apr 2007, 09:07
Well the article looks ok now.

Would like to see a new post everytime there was a typo on pprune D&G.

Keg
1st Apr 2007, 10:42
Six or eight files, or are they ranks?

I guess it depends on whether they're marching 'in line' or 'in column of route'! :E :ok:

Enema Bandit's Dad
1st Apr 2007, 11:00
aircraft thinks an aircraft is an aircraft is an aircraft.

apache
1st Apr 2007, 11:02
Heard this beauty the other day :

GoARoundU DumbAss

Chronic Snoozer
1st Apr 2007, 19:00
Does it strike anyone else as odd that the chief Indonesian investigator would be making comments such as the one attributed to him in the article?

I particularly like how the CVR conversations have made into public domain.

Mr Kurniadi and his team will finalise their results within a month.

Clearly, in Indonesia its no problem to speculate in media whilst involved in the investigation.

Puzzling. And prejudicial.

Defenestrator
1st Apr 2007, 21:09
For mine at the end of the day you can't believe anything you read in a newspaper, or more significantly, anything a journalist has scripted. They are the most inept, bottom feeders in our society. I don't have an axe to grind either. Never had a thing to do with any of them just a constant reminder in the media of how useless they are. It really is the most dishonest and disgraceful position in life.

D:yuk:

lowerlobe
1st Apr 2007, 21:35
Just on sunrise this morning..Indonesian authorities say that there was no proof that the pilots were arguing.....

I wonder if either the capt or the f/o is related to anyone in the government......

Ron & Edna Johns
2nd Apr 2007, 00:06
Defenestrator, just a little harsh, mate. Yes, I don't have a lot of regard for many of them because of their careless and sloppy research. And because of their desire for sensationalism. But "most dishonest and disgraceful position in life"? Not really.

That's reserved for real-estate agents and lawyers........ :E

VH-Cheer Up
2nd Apr 2007, 02:01
On thread...

The Age reports in its headline (online) there was NO argument.

Then goes on to quote the head investigator who says there WAS an argument.

No argument on Garuda Flight Deck (http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/no-argument-between-garuda-pilots-investigator/2007/04/01/1175366058424.html)

OK. Got me confused. Was there an argument or wasn't there? Somebody flip a coin...

J430
2nd Apr 2007, 02:03
Rona and Edna

Congrats, the most technically accurate poste on PPRUNE in ages:D

J

Defenestrator
2nd Apr 2007, 03:05
Messrs R & E Johns,
Some years ago I took the editor of a large regional newspaper to task over the downright false reporting and fabrication of facts WRT an aviation related article that featured on the front page. I decided that best course of action was to humiliate the bastards so I sent my letter "To the Editor". I let him have it both barrells and then challenged the weak prick to print my letter. Of course, which is his absolute right, the letter did not make it to print. Spineless, money grabbing, sensationalist scum. Anything to sell papers. And the clowns have the audacity to call what they do a profession. I concur with your addage about lawyers and real-estate agents but I'd put these losers at the top of the list. What a joke of an existence.
D :suspect:

Angle of Attack
2nd Apr 2007, 05:17
lowerlobe!

Yeah thats right, and I don't really think anone knows what Jet-Star Asia is! Unless they are in the vicinity when the distress flares from a sinking ship are fired shortly! :E :E

Enema Bandit's Dad
2nd Apr 2007, 07:09
aircraft certainly didn't! :bored: