PDA

View Full Version : Irresponsible Media `The Age'


Dark Knight
8th Jan 2008, 03:30
Super Hornets crash at sea - `The Age’ Tuesday Jan 08
Staff reporter - January 8, 2008 - 8:41AM

Two F/A-18 fighter aircraft from the US navy's fifth fleet have crashed in the Persian Gulf, further clouding the future of the Super Hornet's role in Australia's air strike force.

The crashes come as the Federal Government reviews all aspects of the program to update Australia's air force - including the contract to buy 24 Super Hornets as part of a $30 billion program to deliver air superiority in the region.

The US navy said that the fighters crashed "during operations" and three air crew were "in good physical condition" after ejecting from the fighters and being rescued by teams from the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Harry S Truman.

"The cause of the accident is under investigation," the navy said.
It said the aircraft were providing close air support from Iraq when they crashed.

The aircraft were part of the USS Harry S Truman strike group. The aircraft carrier is in the region as part of the US presence in the Gulf, it said.

The crashes will not bolster flagging Australian confidence in the Super Hornet.

Defence Department planners are believed to have been asked to present a detailed analysis on all the fighter jet options to the new Federal Government and how they stack up against likely adversaries - the first time such a study has been done for at least five years.

The Rudd Government is reviewing Australia's agreement to buy 24 Super Hornets from the US as a stop-gap measure while it awaits delivery of up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.

Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon has questioned the Super Hornets purchase - hastily pushed through by his predecessor, Brendan Nelson, now the Opposition Leader - without "proper due process or capability justification".

RAAF planners told the previous government an interim jet was not required and defence analysts say argued the Super Hornet lacks stealth and power.

with REUTERS

US Navy Times (and they should know!)
2 Hornets crash in Persian Gulf, crews safe
Staff report from the Navy Times - Posted : Monday Jan 7, 2008 15:44:08 EST


Two F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets from the carrier Harry S. Truman collided in midair over the northern Persian Gulf on Monday afternoon. Rescue teams saved the three aviators involved in the crash and safely returned all three to the ship.

The two planes — a single-pilot F/A-18E and a two-seat F/A-18F from the Truman’s embarked Carrier Air Wing 3 — were flying over the Gulf en route to a close air support mission in Iraq when the two Super Hornets crashed into each other, according to an official Navy statement.

The Super Hornets’ mission to Iraq makes it unlikely their collision was related to an incident Monday at the south end of the Persian Gulf when five Iranian attack boats harassed three U.S. warships emerging from the Strait of Hormuz, said 5th Fleet commander Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, speaking to reporters at the Pentagon via a satellite video link
.
The naval aviators returned to the Truman by helicopter for medical treatment and are reportedly in “good condition,” Cosgriff said.



Letter to Editor of `The Age’

Editor, The Age

The report reference the crash of two US Navy Super Hornets is a totally irresponsible, inaccurate, speculative, lazy, inept and biased piece of journalism.

Not only should you have required a level of some accuracy and truthfulness within the report but should have severely admonished the `staff reporter’ for allowing `its’ obvious prejudiced opinion to influence and distort what is supposed a news report.

Reference to any respected military aviator or aviation expert prior to finalising the report would have counselled a competent reporter to seek further clarification prior to making the report and the possibility of an in-flight collision was extremely high given the known facts.

Considering `The Age’ supposedly prides itself as one of Australia’s leading newspapers one can only trust a strenuous effort will be made to ensure The Age’s integrity and truthfulness of reporting will be re-established.

DK

VH-XXX
8th Jan 2008, 04:33
And your point is?

Perhaps there was a control failure and they hit each other, so therefore they might be unsafe and not suitable for Australia. Read into it what you want...

lowerlobe
8th Jan 2008, 04:44
Whether the Super Hornets are the best possible aircraft the Government could buy or not for our needs I have 2 questions..

Is it true that the order was ...hastily pushed through by his predecessor, Brendan Nelson, now the Opposition Leader - without "proper due process or capability justification".

And a detailed analysis on all the fighter jet options to the new Federal Government and how they stack up against likely adversaries ..has not been done for 5 years yet the previous government ordered the Super Hornets??

gassed budgie
8th Jan 2008, 04:45
`The Age’ supposedly prides itself as one of Australia’s leading newspapers

Years ago yes, but not now.

Dark Knight
8th Jan 2008, 05:27
The point is, which I considered to have been blatantly obvious, is there are, perhaps two stories:

1/ two FA 18 Super Hornets crashed during operations and the question is why? The reporter and paper made little effort to establish or consider perhaps why and as I pointed out, the initial reports were highly suggestive of a mid-air collision which in this type of operation is a daily hazard. (why? the investigation will attempt to establish why and control failure is, again, unsubstantiated speculation.)

2/ the question whether the FA18 Super Hornet is the correct aircraft for Australian Forces or the process and reasons for the decisions & order is a separate story. Linking the two together in the way of this story illustrates the reporter and The Age's bias and blatant disregard for balanced, considered, truthful reporting.

The history of aviation is following an accident is an investigation to establish the reason for the accident is undertaken from whihc corrective measure will be taken to attempt to prevent similar accidents in the future. Should it be shown a control. software, hardware or human failure is the cause every effort will be made to rectify the problem rapidly and aircraft operations will continue.

The history of the FA18, all versions, show it is a highly efficient, pretty mean killing machine and there are others more conversant with its capabilities and role to argue its merits than I.

DK

Icarus53
8th Jan 2008, 06:09
Sorry DK - I'm having trouble seeing your issue here.

Other than the opening statement of the article (which I agree does suggest a link between the crash incident and consideration of the purchase of the aircraft), I fail to see where the reporter was "inaccurate, irresponsible, speculative or biased".

I read the opening statement (while poorly worded) as simply a method of tying the two stories together in an attempt to save column-inches and make the story more attractive to an editor.

I see no speculation as to the cause of the crash, nor any other suggestion that the crash incident should be of direct relevance in considering whether the ADF should purchase the type.

I would also note that the US Navy Times is no more likely to know the story than civilian media. In fact the Navy PR Department probably provided a standard briefing to all media representatives on the facts of the incident (so far as OPSEC allowed), and would not have published anything themselves which civilian media had not otherwise been privvy to.

Not trying to burst your bubble - but unless I've missed something I can't see what the fuss is about?

Icarus

PS - Glad to here the boys (girls?) got out alright.

AerocatS2A
8th Jan 2008, 07:00
Icarus, there is no speculation true. In fact there are no details at all which means the reader must draw their own conclusions. By linking the story to the issue of the Super Hornet purchase the journalist is not so subtly directing the reader to make the connection that they crashed because of some kind of design fault and that they therefore are not suitable for the RAAF.

Not sure why you can't see that. At the very least it is misleading reporting.

BombsGone
8th Jan 2008, 07:54
Dark Knight, I'm with you on this one. Very poor reporting which ever side of the debate on the Super Hornet you stand on. No informed individual would link the crash with the suitability of the aircraft for Australia.

HotDog
8th Jan 2008, 08:27
No informed individual would link the crash with the suitability of the aircraft for Australia

Only the ones who voted Labor. Stand by for further reams of rhetoric, blaming the Liberal government on gross mismangement that Rudd will put right. It seems "Little Johnny" won't be forgotten for the next three years.:sad:

lowerlobe
8th Jan 2008, 09:08
Good to see you again PAF.....but you didn't answer the questions?...

but instead asked a nonsensical one.....:8:

....Then again you admit you have no idea so I guess that's the answer...

Buster Hyman
8th Jan 2008, 09:32
Err...I find it blatantly clear. The Age is misusing the reported accident as justification that the FA18 Supers are inappropriate for Oz. The implication that I read was that because they crashed, they're no good for us. (It is, indeed, an entirely separate issue, although valid)

lowerlobe
8th Jan 2008, 09:49
..Hey Buster....I thought you'd dropped off the face of the Earth.

I heard a rumour that the journo's wife is the Australian rep for a certain European fighter company.....:E

Buster Hyman
8th Jan 2008, 10:55
Nah...after Howard lost, I was waiting for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse...but they're running late.

Mr YSSY
13th Jan 2008, 03:52
It's not surprising that VH-XXX and Icarus just don't get it. :ugh:

The bastardization of the media gets worse each year, with the boundaries between reporting, opinions, and entertainment getting so completely blurred that we now have many people who either don't recognize or don't understand the social importance of accurate and ethical journalism.

You only need to compare ABC TV nightly news with the commercial stations to see the bias in the story selection, details, emphasis, and prominence.

The Age's article is yet another example of using daily events to sway readers towards the "journalists'" political views. Or, in some cases, the journalist can be so hopelessly biased that they don't even realise what they are doing.

It's very simple:

- Entertainment is another section clearly marked "Entertainment".
- Opinions are in another section clearly marked "Opinion", and usually identifying the author.
- The "News" should only consist of the "who", "where", "what", "why", "how", and "when" - usually corroborated by people who know what they are talking about.

Icarus53
13th Jan 2008, 06:45
Just for the record I get it!

Being a person with the intelligence to recognise what a reporter is doing and simply picking the facts out of the articles rather than taking it all at face value, I simply don't see the need to get worked up about it.

Anyone here who thinks that journalists are employed to provide an accurate news reporting service is naive in the extreme - it's an entertainment service. That is the way media networks are run simply because that vast majority of their customers demand it.

The particular article referenced here was at most a minor transgression. A simple blending of multiple stories to give it more bang for the buck. I grant that certain parties may be led to believe that one is informing the other. Again, I see no need to get worked up about it all.

Icarus

PS - Question for the Mods: Why is this still in "Reporting Points"? I have noticed several threads directly relating to airline/RPT moved to the GA section, but this remains???

Dunnybudgee
14th Jan 2008, 09:29
Same thing here. Anyone can see whats being said but then why (sadly) would anyone get upset about unethical or dishonest "journalism" these days? :ugh:

Cynacism aside, does anyone really expect a journo to tell the truth anymore or even at least try to get their facts staight? :rolleyes:

I've lost count of the number of BS articles I've read / heard or seen concerning our industry over the years. The link below says it all! :)

http://radans.net/jens/planestory.html