Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Media Paranoia.

Old 29th Jul 2008, 08:28
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Media Paranoia.

As some of you know I do work in media here in Australia. I like coming here purely out of my interest in aviation as mere SLF.

A theme at times I pick up on is that you are aware that media do look at this forum. Yes, they do. I would also say that most relevant aviation bodies globally also research this site, as do millitary etc.

Let me put your fears to rest. From my point of view in the last few years since coming here I have crossed over nothing I would consider news worthy. In fact only a fool would actually quote anyone in here or even refer to what people are saying in here. You see, we don't actually know who you are!

In this business believe it or not credibility is an issue. Why you ask does a journalist care about the facts? Lawsuits gentlemen...

The reality is if a media person was silly enough to quote anything in here he would have a hard time backing it up especially if the story was a scoop. Lack of facts, lack of job. Simple. If you think becoming a prof pilot is difficult, try getting work as a journo!

I must admit this forum is a useful starting point for researching anything aviation related, but only that. No offense to PP's but you guys contradict yourselves so often, as SLF you do worry me at times!
Jonny Suave Trousers is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 08:42
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
who cares?

We're not posting for you. This site is entertainment and rumours for pilots and aviation types, not media. The fact that wide discourse is permitted here is what makes it a fun place to hang out. If you want quotable facts, call the airlines.

Good Luck.
pacplyer is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 08:53
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Ah, cheers for that, I think.

Believe me, I know where to get quotable facts. It certainly would not come from a poster on a forum!

My point was that some people in here are a little paranoid about media, which you perhaps are, or else you might refrain from making blanket statements such as "This site is entertainment and rumours for pilots and aviation types, not media." You clearly have an issue with us, which is fine. That was the reason I made my original post, to (hopefully) put your fears to rest.

And in answer to your question of "who cares", got a mirror handy?

Anyway.....
Jonny Suave Trousers is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 08:57
  #4 (permalink)  
Final 3 Greens
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Jonny suave pants

You might be interested to learn that PPRuNe is regularly quoted in the media in the UK.

Perhaps journo credibility needs are inverse to forebear reputation betwix the two countries
 
Old 29th Jul 2008, 09:04
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: on a beach
Age: 64
Posts: 343
Journalist don't need to look at this forum to make all the blunders they do.
beachbumflyer is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 09:05
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
But Johhny,

Sorry about the flame there... You could do everybody a big service and ask a storyline anonymously to check and see if it's even close. Survey says kind of thing. We wouldn't know if you're another SLF or a reporter. You could be sure that way you weren't getting a spoon fed coverup like you often do when you call headquarters.

As to the discrepancies: The thing is that aviation is a continual battle to evade tragedy and it is extremely specialized. No one man knows all the pieces of the puzzle. But individuals can relay personal experiences with subjects that reveal unknown truths about the queried phenomena.

My suggestion would be to private mail an individual you are interested in and ask if he will give you his identity and go on the record.

cheers
pacplyer is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 09:10
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: a green and pleasant land.......sometimes
Posts: 91
This website is used by the media. Fact. Full stop (or period for our friends across the pond). TV and radio reporters have used the line "from a pilots internet site" etc when reporting erm............ stories (i wanted to use other words but didn't want to be pulled by the mod!!)

There are pilots who post here, some good some bad (posters that is - not pilots). It's a shame what is not a news worthy incident can so often be twisted to fit what the media wants to believe took place. However, if you want a open forum where people from outside the industry can join in, you are going to get some pretty interesting idea's - and lets face it - interesting will always win out in the media over SOP's etc............

Just my two penny's worth.

Fly Ginger
Fly Ginger is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 09:45
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: south east UK
Posts: 375
My point was that some people in here are a little paranoid about media
Maybe the media in Australia are whiter than the driven snow and care about facts, well in the UK they don't. The BBC have recently done a number of hatchet jobs using a very selective few quotes from this forum, as have a number of 'news' papers.
I am not paraniod about the media as paranoia suggests an irrational fear. I KNOW the media are lying bottom feeding scum in the UK and have frequently acted to confirm that diagnosis.
Most of our media already have an editorial stance, and they don't care what the facts are, they will just invent some rubbish to make the story fit the conclusion they've already reached. Unfortunately for us, for some reason aviation is in the middle of a really nasty smear campagin in the UK and the most powerful media outlets (BBC and a number of mainstream papers) have a real anti-aviation stance, usually on some very bogus environmental grounds.
757_Driver is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 10:10
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London
Posts: 23
UK press is not so pure

The reality is if a media person was silly enough to quote anything in here he would have a hard time backing it up especially if the story was a scoop. Lack of facts, lack of job. Simple. If you think becoming a prof pilot is difficult, try getting work as a journo!
Actually - The UK media have quoted extensively from this site - for example... when the BA plane landed short of the runway earlier this year one tabloid newspaper journalist ran a double page spread on 'possible causes' which was almost a copy-paste of the technical discussions that were held on this board. This "journalist" implied that the information was gained from 'speaking with aviation experts' .

I don't doubt that there are many experienced people commenting here - I was simply disgusted that a journalist would lift 95% of a article without explicting citing sources.
Pagan_angel is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 10:14
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: cloud 9
Posts: 198
Jonny suave trousers
The difference between professional pilots and professional journalists, is that we base our success on hard facts (which sells seats) -whereas you base yours on sensationalism (which sells media space).
Facts are often more boring than fiction.
point8six is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 11:46
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,300
757_Driver:
Maybe the media in Australia are whiter than the driven snow and care about facts,...
Don't worry, the Australian media are no better than the UK ones. Example: Readers of PPRuNe will instantly recognise the picture of the potable water cylinders, posted in today's Daily Telegraph, labelled as "oxygen cylinders". The PPRuNe picture poster gave warning that the picture may not have been relevant. The Telegraph was less forthcoming.

Jonny Suave Trousers:
but you guys contradict yourselves so often
Do you mean we contradict ourselves... or one another? We have differences of opinion, sure, but in many cases we offer opinion based on many years of experience in our respective fields and on our particular aircraft. It doesn't mean we are necessarily wrong for our own aircraft type/variation (no two aircraft are alike, even if they do have the same numbers and colours on them).
Despite what you say, this is probably one of the better places to come to for information. PPRuNe usually spots, in time, those less-than-expert "experts" the media love to quote. However, I do understand, that, unfortunately, you don't always have the luxury of being able to wait for the truth to come out (Headlines can't wait).

On being sued...
I really don't think newspapers should be terribly worried about being sued over being inaccurate... unless, of course, the comments expressed come down to a more personal level. Sorry to say this, but sometimes we actually do get a big laugh at how wrong the media gets it. However, having said that... what does worry me, is that we don't always know how wrong you get it in other fields (and I don't just mean horoscopes and weather reports ).

Rgds.
NSEU
NSEU is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 12:32
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: _... .. ._
Posts: 27
This website is used by the media. Fact. Full stop (or period for our friends across the pond). TV and radio reporters have used the line "from a pilots internet site" etc when reporting erm............ stories
I'm sure the beauty of PPRuNe is that no matter what theory they decide to peddle, they'll be a crackpot on here to "confirm" their suspicions...

That said, it's not fair to apply this label to all journalists - there are some good ones out there, just seemingly outnumbered and outgunned by the gutter press.

pulled by the mod!!
I think they have a cream for that nowadays..
EGHH is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 12:36
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Festung Europa
Posts: 53
Journalistic professionalism has been reduced to quoting "internet forums" as authorities.

hmmmm

In aviation thats the same as nav systems being replaced by an MP4 download of the destination from google earth.

... and you wish to engage in a debate about credibility

(PS: Nice wind up, a few bites)
Morbid is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 12:41
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: next to a beautiful lake
Posts: 73
And, Jonny,...

...what was the inspiration to start such a thread ? rumours ? news ?

for the serious journos, this is a site of information and connections, and for the serious pilots it's a site of informations and connections too.

For the not-so-serious folks, well, it's a site to bash either pilots, journos, ryanair and/or others.

finally there are the "readers" which love to read the comments, technical background infos, jokes, and so on, but - most importantly - keep quiet most of the time...........
HeadingSouth is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 12:43
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,658
What IS the lowest form of life?

I was quite impressed with the lady on BBC 4 who said that the lowest form of life was "pond-life". (An ex-crew member, describing difficult SLF). However, journalists are clearly below this, so what should they be called?
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 12:49
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 77
Posts: 1,537
Originally Posted by 757_Driver View Post
I KNOW the media are lying bottom feeding scum in the UK and have frequently acted to confirm that diagnosis.
Most of our media already have an editorial stance, and they don't care what the facts are, they will just invent some rubbish to make the story fit the conclusion they've already reached.
I just want to make a distinction between media and journalists. Yes, some journalists are bottom feeders but it is the editorial stance, and sub-editors, that are perhaps most culpable.

There are journalists, such as Mike Smith, that post under their own names and defend a good reputation. They are known and would soon lose credibility if they resorted to bottom feeder tactics. However there was a case short while back where a BBC journalist came on PPRuNe to apologise for the editorial treatment of his article. He still got pilloried but at least he was able to show his full, unedited, article.

And do they use PPRuNe? Oh yes, indubitably.

Last edited by Wader2; 29th Jul 2008 at 13:28.
Wader2 is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 13:23
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Riga
Posts: 244
I have to admire a journo who enters the lion's den with the objective of reporting a valid and factual article. The problem is that so many report without the slightest resemblance to reality, they spin for the reader. I feel saddened when I hear my elderly mother brainwashed by stories of pilots "flighting with the controls" (which she then relays to me verbatim). I would love for her to have some concept of what my work entails, but instead she gets nothing but Bravo Sierra.

If a journalist were to request an interview on certain topics (e.g. regulatory framework, or some such other non specific), then I would be happy to be interviewd provided I could proof read (and would any editor ever allow that?). Alas, for many journos it is simply sufficient to write the proverbial pile of cp.

For those (i suspect the monority) who are genuinely sincere, I feel sorry that your genuine requests are met with hostility. For those who are more typical, you deserve all the comments you get!

Heres a thought for budding journos. Write an actual factual report, then post it on here for comment. It would build your credibility and you may find that we dont bite as hard the next time!
Romeo India Xray is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 13:28
  #18 (permalink)  

The Veloceraptor of Lounge Lizards
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: From here the view is lovely
Posts: 339
Having experienced at first hand "fair and responsible reporting" from a journo after an accident I was involved in I'm bloody careful about letting them anywhere near me.

An "aviation correspondent" gave such a ridiculous version of what happened the day after the event that my employers demanded an apology and retraction.The retraction was eventually to happen after the AAIB report was published. (He had not spoken to me, my employers or anyone connected with the accident)

Months later the AAIB reported and our esteemed aviation correspondent placed his own utterly ridiculous spin on it and ignored the AAIB praise for me and the retraction he had earlier promised.

He was known as a total t***er in the area and at a later date I did enjoy picking up his pint of ale in a pub frequented by pilots and spitting in it in front of him.

Childish response I know, but less likely to get legal bother than administering the beating I really wanted to give him.

VH
verticalhold is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 13:46
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Journalists are vital to a free society. Its even in our constitution (freedom of press)

They can be very useful in aviation safety if they take the time to find out the truth.

In the meantime, I would like to give this journalist the same advice I give to US journalists and aviation.

FOLLOW THE MONEY (yes, just like deepthroat gave to woodward).

IF the money is lacking, it is likely a shortcut was taken and something vital was not fixed in the proper way. Witness Alaska Airlines and the MD80 (md82or 3) that crashed near Pt. Magu.

AND, the WORD PLUNGE is perfectly fine for the emergency descent. In fact, every pilot I know in the USA says: "we did a high dive in the simulator". Don't you guys around the world say the same thing?

Slang in our profession is bad. Have you ever heard the command: dangle the dunlops?

I had never heard it before, it was a lousy slang term for "landing gear down".

The pilot who used it was more interested in being "cool" than in being good.


Have you ever heard the term: book'em danno.

It means flaps 50 degrees...figure it out if you can.

And how many of you have used the term "heading" when you really meant "course".?>

IT IS SLANG, shorthand if you will. Journalists think in terms of headlines...even in TV.

SO, Mr trousers or whatever you call yourself...LOOK into what causes accidents. Nevil Shute, who called Australia home for awhile said: airplanes don't crash in and of themselves, perhaps one crash in a thousand is truly an act of God, instead they crash because men are irresolute, reckless or careless.

All the best to you downunder from us up here...and God Bless Australia...you guys are alright!
sevenstrokeroll is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2008, 14:05
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 3,829
Jonny Suave Trousers, the "Australian" used to be my paper of choice but eventually gave up on it because, as 757_Driver said "I KNOW the media are lying bottom feeding scum in the UK and have frequently acted to confirm that diagnosis. Most of our media already have an editorial stance, and they don't care what the facts are, they will just invent some rubbish to make the story fit the conclusion they've already reached." applied equally well. Was interviewed for a personal interest feature and asked the reporter to allow me to vet the copy before it went to press, knowing that errors all too easily arise just by reason of miscommunication and misunderstanding. Boy, did the hackles come up for daring to suggest such a thing. True to form, when the paper came out they couldn't spell the name and had the incident occurring in the wrong state. Don't try and tell me that the average media person is not just a little bit precious aka Richard Carlton. Right up there with the average "celebrity". Unfortunately the few good ones get tarred in the process.
Brian Abraham is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.