If I did my job like the media…….

[C441]

Apparently the aircraft below is a Cessna 210. Excellent. I've now got an extra 1000 hours on twins if the Fairfax press/Nine network are accurate.

But seriously, why can't a reporter just dial their Iphone and ring someone to clarify a piece of information for which most wouldn't expect them to have a reasonable knowledge.

The standard of journalism continues to deteriorate.:rolleyes:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/content/dam/images/g/r/f/1/n/z/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.grf0i2.png/1473732274715.jpg

[Dangly Bits]

Oh what happened? Where?

[C441]

Small aircraft makes emergency landing at Gold Coast.

Brisbane Times (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/small-aircraft-makes-emergency-landing-at-gold-coast-airport-20160913-grf0i2.html)

[mattyj]

Thielerts strike again?

[Egipps]

I'm confused ... again .. often. Looks like a twin to me - although clearly not a Cessna 210.

“The incident involved a Diamond DA 42 aircraft and both the runway and taxiway at Gold Coast Airport were closed for a short period of time as a result,”

No Cookies | Gold Coast Bulletin (http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/gold-coast/emergency-services-are-responding-to-an-incident-with-a-small-aircraft-at-coast-airport/news-story/229b8316b1b69f2321f30704f81e36c9)

[troppo]

start a twitter hashtag like #aviationreporting101, then use eg @brisbanetimes and @'the author'. starting shaming authors/publishers into getting their facts right. if I was the editor I'd make sure facts are correct before publishing.

[spinex]

The latest edition of the Bulletin's online report advises that the Airport Co originally advised that it was a C210 and later corrected their statement to reflect the Diamond. If correct I'm inclined to give the reporter the benefit of the doubt, just this once.

[27/09]

Was it a wheels up?

The props look intact but why else use a crane to lift it like that when you'd normally tow it?

[Centaurus]

The props look intact but why else use a crane to lift it like that when you'd normally tow it?

27/09 is online now Report Post


Maybe the crane operator also operates a towing service and makes more money by using a crane:E

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

At least channel seven in Brisbane identified it correctly...

[airtags]

Apparently the aircraft below is a Cessna 210. Excellent. I've now got an extra 1000 hours on twins if the Fairfax press/Nine network are accurate.

But seriously, why can't a reporter just dial their Iphone and ring someone to clarify a piece of information for which most wouldn't expect them to have a reasonable knowledge.

The standard of journalism continues to deteriorate.:rolleyes:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/content/dam/images/g/r/f/1/n/z/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.grf0i2.png/1473732274715.jpg
C441 the issue is that media training is certainly not what it used to be - there's a modern mandate be first and it doesn't matter if you're not right. That said, with any incident or crisis comms the airport, CASA, AsA et al., need to remember that if you're not on the front foot and controlling the story by telling the story first with fact, it WILL ALWAYS end up being reported adversely with errors.

Media Management 101:
1. If there's a stuff up/incident/accident, take the lead as you won't get to hide it
2. What happens on the plane will be uploaded to YouTube and Twitter usually before you can exit the active runway
3. Unless the journo has flying cred & experience, as a rare few of us do ; ) don't expect them to get it right, particularly if they are Y Gen, blonde and more concerned about their hair and lip gloss (latter also applies to the boys)
3. The journo's chief of staff doesn't care if its a Cessna or Cesspool - they will always say "just file the story - we can fix it later"
4. "Later" never happens as why bother re-cutting a story when it's gone to air already
5. First to file the story is copied by others - usually because they are second to file and the corporate PR person from the airport/organisation has not called back and probably still has their head up a dead bear's bum thinking that they can dash off a media release later and it will all go away
6. Pilots make for crap on-camera grabs
7. The CEO is only concerned about the Board and his/her bonus
8. The Board is only concerned about the share price and their next appointment
9. Nobody is concerned about the pilot (unless he gives a really colourful on-camera grab, then he's a hero...... or the scapegoat)
10. Despite a faulty thronmiester that should have been replaced and a master caution light covered by gaffer tape, there was never any danger to passengers and the crane that was used to lift the aircraft onto a flatbed was only a precaution

Actually, this clip sums up how a typical news story goes together:
https://www.facebook.com/C5Dnews/videos/1181711718540602/


AT

[WannaBeBiggles]

Could you imagine the mockery that would come their way if they said something like this

http://www.slturnerconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/mack-truck-crash.jpg
The Ford Mustang jackknifed while towing a boat. :}

[das Uber Soldat]

"CLARIFICATION: An initial statement from the Gold Coast Airport had confirmed the aircraft was a Cessna 210 however they have since revised their statement to reflect the aircraft involved in the emergency landing was a Diamond DA42."

Absolutely no acknowledgement of their error. Blame it on someone else. :ugh:

South Park covered this nicely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd0p96miSK8

[cooperplace]

I talk to the media a lot about my (non-aviation) job. Generally they are just ordinary people trying to do a job with tight deadlines. They appreciate correction and education as long as it's courteous. It's a good idea to build relationships with the press: not only can you ensure a higher level of coverage, but also you can get your own story (whatever it is) into the media. Remember, they want and need stories, their jobs depend on it.

[Stanwell]

".. just ordinary people trying to do a job .."

Oh yes, now let's see if I've got this right..
It appears then, that the required level of professionalism within journalism these days is a bit less than that of a trained burger-flipper who's 'just trying to do a job'.
He works to tight deadlines as well as producing a product acceptable to the consumer.

If a burger chain regularly committed as many stuff-ups as I've seen in the media lately, they'd soon be out of business.


p.s. The unquestioning publication of any press-release would also fall under the same category, would it?
.

[pilotchute]

News isn't news anymore. TV networks insist news must also be entertaining. They want viewers to tune in and stay on that channel. As soon as something becomes loaded with objectivity and facts, people tend to tune out because they don't understand what going on. I know people that still think "A Current Affair" is credible and balanced reporting.

[Pinky the pilot]

I know people that still think "A Current Affair" is credible and balanced reporting.

Sadly; Quite true.:ugh: Once even heard such a show described as '....serious investigative Journalism...':hmm::rolleyes:

Stanwell; Very well put!:ok:

[Freewheel]

Apparently the aircraft below is a Cessna 210. Excellent. I've now got an extra 1000 hours on twins if the Fairfax press/Nine network are accurate.

But seriously, why can't a reporter just dial their Iphone and ring someone to clarify a piece of information for which most wouldn't expect them to have a reasonable knowledge.

The standard of journalism continues to deteriorate.:rolleyes:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/content/dam/images/g/r/f/1/n/z/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.grf0i2.png/1473732274715.jpg


Having dealt with builders a lot lately, I'm convinced that it's an industry made up of journalists that didn't make it.

[Compylot]

Gentlemen.


I share your frustrations...


I share your pain...


I too, find it hard to sleep at night knowing that an aircraft has not been accurately described in a news article.


What can we do?


Well, it helps to talk.


I feel much better talking about it and you all should too.


Get it off your chest!


Sometimes I even go outside at night and scream into the wind, "WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!?????"


My questions go unanswered, but I do take solace in knowing I have the support of other professionals as frustrated as me in this small corner of the internet.


Don't bottle it up Gentlemen, get your frustrations OUT, it feels good!!


Good luck and don't ever think you stand alone, stay strong men :ok:

[gerry111]

Pinky mentioned:

'....serious investigative Journalism...'

Bring back Jana Wendt, I reckon. ;)

[gretzky99]

I think I'd actually rather read something incorrect form a 20 year old intern journalists than anything from Australia's Aviation 'Expert'.....

[das Uber Soldat]

Complylot, whilst Im sure we all enjoyed your tremendously intellectual satire, there is a point to be made. If they can't get this right, or in fact anything in any aviation related story in history right, then how can the media be trusted to accurately report on more serious, complex and nuanced matters?

No its not the end of the world for misstating the make and model of aircraft in this article, but given the frequency of trivial errors such as this then it speaks directly to the credibility of news journalism as it exists today. A lot of people believe wholesale what they see on the news, journalists have a responsibility both professional and ethical to be accurate. I believe they on the whole have abandoned this responsibility and that is something that does matter.

[Compylot]

Complylot, whilst Im sure we all enjoyed your tremendously intellectual satire, there is a point to be made. If they can't get this right, or in fact anything in any aviation related story in history right, then how can the media be trusted to accurately report on more serious, complex and nuanced matters?

No its not the end of the world for misstating the make and model of aircraft in this article, but given the frequency of trivial errors such as this then it speaks directly to the credibility of news journalism as it exists today. A lot of people believe wholesale what they see on the news, journalists have a responsibility both professional and ethical to be accurate. I believe they on the whole have abandoned this responsibility and that is something that does matter. So you're saying that 'journalists' cant get anything in any aviation related story in history right..'? and using this to make the conclusion that everything else they report on must be inaccurate too?


C'mon, stop getting your knickers in a twist, I mean we're talking about an online article of a few paragraphs concerning a minor mishap. Perhaps if there were discrepancies in the quality of reporting and facts in a major news story like the Four Corners report on the Norfolk Island ditching we could be more concerned.


I'm sure that every other industry has technical inaccuracies within news articles and of course it's frustrating to those involved.


All that happens here is that every few weeks when an aircraft is identified wrong we get 3 pages of pontificating sarcastic inside 'jokes' more than any real concern or debate over journalistic standards. (oh, I must have 1000 more twin hours)


Can't wait for the next 'emergency' landing or "Piper Centurion Airbus" to have a thronomister failure :ok:


(Oh, and if you check out the original article there has been a note added at the bottom of the story correcting the aircraft type, so we can all sleep well tonight!)

[das Uber Soldat]

You're suggesting that Journalists suddenly pay attention, fact check and have a measure of integrity when reporting on non aviation stories? I can't think of a single aviation article I've read in many years that got even the basic elements correct.

From this, I think it more than fair to question the credibility of the news sources we're presented with. They have an established pattern of behaviour, what evidence do you provide that this changes depending on subject?

C'mon, stop getting your knickers in a twist, I mean we're talking about an online article of a few paragraphs concerning a minor mishapI'm aware its trivial, and thats the point. If they can't get the trivial things correct, how can you expect them to get the complicated things correct?

Sorry but I hold the media in very low esteem. Perhaps my bias shines through too brightly.

[Compylot]

I'm aware its trivial, and thats the point. If they can't get the trivial things correct, how can you expect them to get the complicated things correct?

Sorry but I hold the media in very low esteem. Perhaps my bias shines through too brightly. Yeah OK, fair enough :rolleyes:

Perhaps you need to get out more..? Maybe ditch Wolfenstein for something new?

I've heard of this great new game called Pokemon Go.

It seems to get lots of morbidly obese losers out of their homes hunting Pokedex, maybe you too could do with some sunshine :uhoh:

Just a thought...

[Stanwell]

Compylot,
Your trolling and insulting posts are just getting a bit much.
Please go away.

[Desert Flower]

I think I'd actually rather read something incorrect form a 20 year old intern journalists than anything from Australia's Aviation 'Expert'.....

Seems to be a couple of them! :ugh:

DF.

[j3pipercub]

So, an internet troll on a third rate internet forum, whose little diatribes have become so predictable they could cure insomnia, tells someone else to 'get out more'. Priceless.

I hate to agree with DUS, but his logic is frustratingly sound.

[Compylot]

Gentlemen, we need to get back on track here!


Focus!


The original intent of this thread was to cast a light on the inaccurate identification of an aircraft pictured in an online news article!!


There was outrage, wit and a bit of light banter surrounding a twin engine aeroplane described as a single!


Credibility was questioned, integrity was put on trial and conclusions were drawn!!


All this on a third rate internet forum!