What Sunfish said:ok:

My bet is that most of the condescending drivel is not from pilots at all.

I agree also with the OP the standard of journalism regarding the facts about an aviation incident is decidedly poor.
I've mentioned before that we pilots should put together a committee to oversee and endorse appropriately accurate technical reporting.

This was in response to that awful movie 'Flight' and I see no barrier to perhaps expanding the AAAPs role in providing technical advice to journalists whenever an aviation incident hits the news.

Regarding 'said' incident at Melbourne involving the Vietnam A330 methinks it was that pesky Thronomister playing up again :ok:

good points regarding passenger perceptions
 

Some good points, methinks. Acceleration affecting perceptions of orientation etc.

As a consumer of news...
 

I of course suspect the absolute veracity of any story that is grabbed in time to meet a broadcast or print deadline.

Except that I don't care, really. When presented with a story about a field or endeavour of which I am ignorant I go away satisfied that I have the gist of the event, the immediate repercussions and move on to the next thing.

I am sure that there is similar outraged sputtering inside any specialist field when an event in their sphere makes the news. Don't forget that half of the target audience bell curve won't make sense of most of it anyway. And they are the ones buying the crap peddled on the ads.

While we may get agitated at inaccuracies in trivial details, Joe Blow don't know.

Save your righteous indignation for so-called experts like G. Thomas who have no clues in the clues closet. Providing commentary or "expert" background information that is inaccurate is unforgivable. What is even worse is the CNN phenomena of journalists interviewing other journalists for background. Back in the days of real standards that was simply not done.

Who reads newspapers anyway? Tabloid trash.
Reporters/writers think they are gods gift to the world yet forget their little piece is written on paper worth maybe 2 cents.

Garbage collectors rate miles above newpaper 'reporters' in my books. Miles.


Supreme professionals safely handled something they train for and everyone walks away safe.

What's the big story again?

I think some of you guys are getting all worked up over this journo thingy.

I mean they are in an industry that is aimed at the masses & survives on sensationalism alone. It's not an exact science for them never will be unlike our industry which relies on a far greater level of acuracy.
We as pilots/engineers & other aviation professionals all know what really goes on behind the scenes but that's where it ends.

Mr & Mrs Joe Public almost crave for want of a better word for the death & mayhem on TV of a night time that now exists in our society daily (Christ look at all the police, crime shows we are exposed to, we want it & they sell it big time!!!) & anything to do with Aeroplanes especially when danger is the headline is sought after & the media know this & they run with it like a hot potato!. Automobile crashes & deaths are almost common place on TV every day/night, we have almost become complacent with that. The media want mileage, not common place.
Just look at the fiasco with the two high profile fools at Bondi fighting in the streets recently, I mean who really cares what they do, they have the same feelings as the rest of us, the media have made an industry out of such antics, they thrive on it & the public lap it up!

Now whether it's right or wrong, incorrect not factual or whatever is mostly irrelevant as far as the media are concerned & GT has proved this numerous times in the press.

Pain, death, misery & all the sadness that goes with it sells, simple as that really & the most saddest part about all this is that we revel in it right here!

Wmk2

I have given up reading newspaper since I have joined pprune.....this is where you find all the facts about aviation.

Hahahahahaha ... Thanks for the laugh mate...

Engine Change
 

The aircraft in Sky Team livery has been outside John Holland at Melbourne Airport. Still there this morning. I understand that engineers will fly in from Vietnam to do the engine change in the John Holland hanger.

Being neither an Austral-Pacifician nor an aviator I am begging forgiveness for barging in, but I would like to comment on some posters view of aviation related journalism.
As a mariner, and one involved in the odd published "incident" I have some experience with the medias description of the events.
Suffice to say, they were not accurate, nor did they use the correct terminology. As a result I have a huge file of newspaper clippings and the odd VHS cassette with the yakkings of news-anchors and "experts". They are always a hit when old sailors get together for a beer or several. I suppose we consider it entertainment and don't expect more from non-professionals.
That said, none of our passengers and not even all the crew would describe the proceedings equally. Human I guess.
If I might add, I have also pax'ed on a B767 when one engine went bang and some parts headed for terra firma and even though professional aviators would consider this a non-event since the airplane landed safely, I for one didn't. :E
Per

As I have said before, the news media (with a very few exceptions) is no longer about accurately reporting the news. It's about selling a paper or attracting advertisers.

Bland doesn't sell, hysteria does, so the knowledge and expertise of the reporter is irrelevant if the story sells.

New engine arrived courtesy of Cathay 748 this afternoon, currently sitting on the Menzies cargo ramp. I'm guessing the Vietnam Airlines engineers will be working away by the weekend.

A few small observations about the declining standards in journalism...

It's true that many news editors aren't too concerned about accuracy; after all, they know that what is printed today is tomorrow's wrapping paper for fish and chips or the liner in the kitty litter. The prevalent attitude in most newsrooms is to get the story out and, if absolutely necessary, print a correction later (although the correction is usually hidden away in a corner somewhere).

The problem is made far worse by economic considerations. Just like airlines, media outlets want to maximise profit and minimise cost. The difference is that in airlines you still (hopefully!) have someone who knows something about flying at the pointy end of the aircraft. Today most newspaper editors are people who know something about marketing and fundraising and very little about journalism.

Many years ago to become an editor you worked your way up from the bottom - starting as a court reporter, where you learned to get things right - and then climbing the ladder, all the time judged by more experienced journalists.

Today one can waltz in with a marketing degree, promise to turn a failing outlet around and show a profit, and boom -there's your new editor. So this clown, who knows nothing about reporting, sends reporters out to get the story and threatens disciplinary action or dismissal if a reporter wants to delay a story to check facts.

Then of course everyone is trying to outdo everyone else in terms of timing and sensationalism. It's a miracle they ever get anything right!

**end of rant**