Sensationalism hits The Daily Mirror

[InTheAir]

Thoroughly dissapointed I am with them for this story :*

WE COULD HAVE BOMBED ANY TARGET IN LONDON (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12685782&method=full&siteid=50143)

This sort of journalism simply adds to take away the liberties of every day law abiding citizens.

[Aussie Andy]

Absolutely shameless - still, what can we expect from some of the rags we call newspapers in this country...

[Roundouthigh]

I agree with you. I fly out of Biggin and know the personalities involved. If I was the company mentioned in the report I would have my lawyers studying the article very carefully.

[Hilico]

This is the second thread on this subject I've come across in the last five minutes, and I had to say something there too.

After an explosion that spread my cornflakes all over the ceiling this morning, I calmed down and started to think. Wait to see if any politicians, journalists, other vermin etc etc pick it up with a view to making publicity for themselves. If it goes quiet, leave well alone. Keep thinking of reasonable arguments that make the journos look as stupid and sensation-seeking as they are but keep them in reserve.

You have NO CONTROL over how what you say to a journalist is presented, as many many people have discovered to their cost.

Steve Warner.

[aiglon]

Leaving aside the typical sensationalism that one expects from these rags, how did the journo know that Lord Tebbit's guests couldn't hear themselves speak. Or was that just another "journalistic fact" - ie a complete fabrication :D

[knobbygb]

1500 feet - that's nothing! I passed less than 100ft from the houses of parliment last week :eek:

I was in my car, which would probably be capable of carrying around 1 tonne of explosives, if I was that sort of person. There were absolutley no security checks on the contents of the boot or glove compartment. Nobody asked for my address or any ID. With all the traffic, I was in the visinity of the building for MINUTES! Anything could have happened :mad:

I took a photograph to prove what I'd done and send it to a tabloid, but surprisingly they weren't interested in my 'scoop' :confused:

I think it's a bloody disgrace - they're asking for somthing to happen allowing motorists to drive into major cities like that. Ban private ownership of cars, I say! :mad:

[AerBabe]

Hmm... shouldn't this be merged with the 'Humour' thread? I think I laughed almost as much!
We passed the Commons three times, causing so much noise that guests at a special lunch attended by Lord Tebbit could hardly hear themselves speak.
*pauses to dry her eyes*
:D :D :D

[formationfoto]

Aviation is not the only area to suffer from sensationalism but we are rather in the firing line. As a journalist I suppose I have to take some of the blame for the rest of the industry but fortunately I have not been put in the position where I have had to create stories which over sensationalise. The drive for a good story can often get in the way of sensible, calm, analysis. I posted here on a similar subject when a local newspaper known to me hired a light aircraft which they then directed to fly low over a nuclear power station. You can blame journalists but some blame must also lie with those who assist journos in creating nonsense even if they only do it through ignorance.

[BRL]

formationfoto You can blame journalists but some blame must also lie with those who assist journos in creating nonsense even if they only do it through ignorance. Agreed but only if the pilots involved knew what the journos were up to. In your post it looks like you are saying blame the pilots simply for taking them up. I could be wrong though........

[Red Four]

Might well be a sensationalist article, but is there actually anything untrue in it?
Seems to me that it is just pointing out one of the many lpotential oop-holes that still exist in aviation, despite supposedly all having been thoroughly overhauled after 911, by the the security services.

[virgin]

formationfoto
Can't see what your comments have got to do with what the Mirror have done. It was a normal pleasure flight over London. The company would probably have taken them even if they'd known they were journalists - becuase the company did nothing wrong. Newspapers use helicopters all the time for photos and even for transporting journos if it's a big story.

Red Four
You can't take away all risk, and life would be unbearable if we even tried.
The sort of people who carry out terrorist acts of the sort the Mirror is being stupid about aren't amateurs doing something on a sudden whim. They know what htey're doing and plan. All many of the security measures do is inconvenience the rest of us - they don't make a scrap of difference to the determined terrorist.
Much of it is window dressing to try stop our idiot Press stirring up hte average reader who doesn't know the first thing about the issues involved.
eg We now can't allow pax in the cockpit, but US carriers couldn't on 9/11 - didn't stop the terrorists.
Same goes for the locked doors argument.

BTW, if you flew a Jetranger into a building it would bounce off in little bits - might break a window or two i suppose. The London car-bombers of years ago didn't use light helicopters, they stacked cars with explosives. Terrorists are evil, but they're not stupid. If you want to blow up Parliament, you're not going to do it with the sort of weight of explosives a GA helicopter can carry.

I wish I bought the Mirror, then I could stop buying it in disgust! :mad:

[Flying Lawyer]

Superb post Virgin:ok:

This is the full text of BHH's response. It will be interesting to see how much of it the Mirror publishes.

“Terrorflying’ Story
Response by Captain Bill Lowry.
Managing Director and Chief Pilot of ‘BIGGIN HILL HELICOPTERS’

“Biggin Hill Helicopters has conducted sight-seeing tours over London for 10 years and I’m very proud of the unblemished safety record which we’ve established. We comply with all regulations laid down by the Civil Aviation Authority and, in common with all other Air Operators, we’re constantly monitored by the Authority. The Authority has never once had cause to criticise, or suggest changes to, our procedures.
“Helicopter operators are not required to search passengers or their bags, and I’m not aware of any operator in the country that does so. I think it’s very unfair that the article gives the impression that our procedures are in some way lax.
“If the Mirror would like to see the rules changed, it would have been much fairer if you’d taken the matter up with the authorities. We don’t search passengers or bags and, if you’d asked us, we would have told you. There was no need to use such under-handed methods as if you were exposing some shameful behaviour. We have nothing to hide.
“It’s a great pity you resorted to sensationalising an otherwise accurate story with exaggeration and a number of inaccuracies.”

Captain Simon Maynard, pilot of the helicopter, said: “It is simply not true that I hovered over the Houses of Parliament, yet your front page headline claims that I did for five minutes. That is simply not true and is blatant scare-mongering. All helicopters over London are under strict Air Traffic Control at all times. The Heathrow radar trace will confirm that what your reporters claim is not true. You’re welcome to obtain a print-out from the National Air Traffic Service. By the way, I’m mid 20s, not late 20s.”
Captain Maynard has been a professional pilot for five years. He holds an Airline Transport Pilots Licence, the highest level of professional pilots licence.

“You suggest a terrorist could manoeuvre a helicopter to hit the Houses of Parliament. Let’s keep this in perspective - we’re talking about a small helicopter the size of a mini here, yet lorries and trucks drive past the Houses of Parliament and Buckingham Palace every day. They could be packed with tons of explosives. Are you suggesting all lorries and trucks should be prohibited from driving through Central London? Where do you draw the line? If we change our way of life to try to cope with every conceivable means a terrorist might use, the terrorists have won anyway.”


Tudor Owen

Note: Posted with the permission of my clients.

[formationfoto]

BRL
Sorry - you are right. In the interests of a short post I did not draw attention to the difference between the London helicopter flight and the example I referred to. In the earlier incident I believe a journo and photographer hired / took a trial lesson (not sure which) a four seat light aircraft and asked it to fly low over a nuclear installation (which in itself was illegal assuming the heights given in the story were true). In this case it should have been totally obvious what the journo / photogtrapher were doing and stupid of the pilot / hiring organisation to allow it. I am sure that this was not the case with the BHH incident.

Doesn't remove the need though (unfortunate though it is) to be deeply suspicious of investigative journalists - they are trying to create a story. In my career I have previously made money from training people in how to deal with such people and how to handle interviews. Flying clubs in particular should be conscious of the need to keep vigilant.

If there is a light aircraft crash in your vicinity at anytime you must assume that any photo journalist asking for a trial lesson is probably looking for a story.

One day I am sure we will have a student killed on a solo cross country (god forbid). I can see the story now - "we booked a flight and without any previous experience we were allowed to use the controls.... I could quire easilly have crashed right in the middle of the city of....".

Not justifying the acts of those who work in the same area as me but we DO need to be alert to the way they work.

[AliB]

Unfortunately the politicians have picked up on it. Take a look at:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12690208&method=full&siteid=50143

to see how pleased the Mirror is to inform us that the right honorable messrs Darling and Keatch have taken up their case! And after such a short time - isn't it reassuring that these gentlemen are so hard working to get themselves up to speed on the issue to make such informed statements so soon after the "sensational revelations"!

(Credit to TL of the Flyer Forum for finding this)

:*

AliB

[28thJuly2001]

The move comes amid demands for action to secure the skies over Britain's most important buildings. Liberal Democrat MPs will ask for air exclusion zones to be set up around Parliament, Downing Street and Buckingham Palace.

Correct me if I am wrong , but wouldn't the terrorists ignore the air exclusion zones and risk losing their license?
Just imagine the conversation (in a terrorist accent)

"Hey lets crash our flimsy little helicopter into the Houses Of Parliament and break a few windows"...
"We can't, there is an Air Exclusion Zone"
"Oh b0ll0cks",

Ho Hum, I suppose it keeps the man in the street happy.
28th,,

[AlanM]

MMmmmm

If the press are that concerned, maybe they would like to stop requesting that G-OITN's twin squirrell flies to incidents often over central London and stops phoning me up asking if there are any TRA's when an "incident" is ongoing.

After all - you just can't trust ANYONE in a helicopter can you!

There was up to FIVE helicopters over central London 2 weeks ago filming the first day of the congestion charge - ALL journos!

maybe they will ban them all in the future!!!!

[Fly Stimulator]

In case anybody is unaware of it, another thread on this subject (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=82950) is running in the Rotorheads forum.

It has some excellent contributions from Flying Lawyer including the response to the Mirror from Biggin Hill Helicopters which, needless to say, the paper didn't feel its readers should be troubled with.

[steamchicken]

We could have hurled a bomb

Bloody ridiculous...what sort of bomb exactlY? Shaped like a black cannonball with a spluttering fuse sticking out? A very poor piece of journalism in all. But at least they got Tebbit with the downdraught.

[Northern Highflyer]

What's more dangerous, someone taking a pleasure flight over London with the (extremely remote) risk that someone might be a fruit loop and try to crash it....

or the Mirror doing a 4 page spread on just how our troops would take Iraq in detail, or explaining how they managed to sneak into a nuclear plant ??

Talk about giving people ideas.

Amazes me how they "get hold" of such information - still it sells papers I guess !