Pathetic CBS journalism on GA airport security

[Ron Lee]

Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
airport security.

Ron Lee

[Max T, CFI]

The video segment is now posted on the web at http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml
under the title "Airport Terror Targets?" Talk about fear mongering--and it's not even a rating sweeps month!
Max T, MCFI

Ron Lee > wrote in message ...
> Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
> reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
> airport security.
>
> Ron Lee

[Dan Luke]

Careless, clueless, insubstantial and sensational; about par for TV
news.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

[CFLav8r]

What I would like to know is NOT who is keeping on "Eye on America" but who
is keeping an eye on Bob Orr.
Word at the local airstrip is that Bob is not happy with his job at CBS and
is considering taking flying lessons.
Worse yet, I have seen no fence surrounding the community where many of the
rich news casters have their homes and planes.
So on the next episode of CBS "Eye on America" they will show us how
renegade news casters can at any moment become homemade terrorists.
CBS News Correspondent Bob Orr will show us how an ordinary pipe bomb can be
shoved up his arse in an attempt to sneek it through security.

[C J Campbell]

"Ron Lee" > wrote in message
...
| Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
| reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
| airport security.

"Reputable news organization" is an oxymoron.

[David Reinhart]

And Dan Rather, it turns out, has a home near 39R (Lakeway Airport, Lakeway,
TX). The next time he shows up there the airport tennants should perform a
citizen's arrest for trespassing.

Dave Reinhart


CFLav8r wrote:

> What I would like to know is NOT who is keeping on "Eye on America" but who
> is keeping an eye on Bob Orr.
> Word at the local airstrip is that Bob is not happy with his job at CBS and
> is considering taking flying lessons.
> Worse yet, I have seen no fence surrounding the community where many of the
> rich news casters have their homes and planes.
> So on the next episode of CBS "Eye on America" they will show us how
> renegade news casters can at any moment become homemade terrorists.
> CBS News Correspondent Bob Orr will show us how an ordinary pipe bomb can be
> shoved up his arse in an attempt to sneek it through security.

[Bartscher]

Ok, I admit I may have gone a bit overboard, but I had to respond to CBS on
this one...

----------------------------------------------------
I find it disheartening that CBS News has degenerated to using scare tactics to
boost ratings with the story on "Are Local Airports Terror Targets?" The
freedom to "come and go as you please" is presented as something that should
scare the average person. We also live in a society where you are free to drive
your SUV anywhere without the government tracking you, despite the fact that
there could be explosives hidden in it. You can rent a truck without a
background check, despite the fact that they have been used in horrific
terrorist acts. You can even run television stories that suggest methods for
performing terrorism to potential terrorists, as CBS has just done this
evening.

Vulnerability may be a price we pay for general aviation's freedom, but it is
also a price we pay for having a free society overall, and even a price we pay
for having a free press. Before you go too far in attacking freedoms in the
name of safety, it would be wise to examine your own role in communicating
these ideas, and in making our country more vulnerable.

Your story advocates cutting the freedoms of others in the name of security. I,
for one, would not advocate putting a muzzle on the media with legal
restrictions, although I do believe that those restrictions would lead to a
more secure country. More important than security is freedom, and those
restrictions would be an attack on the freedom of speech which is a core part
of American society. I do however, advocate a media that behaves more
responsibly.

Perhaps the best way to address security at the nation's airports is to enlist
the more than 600,000 pilots across the country to responsibly observe the
actions at those airports. Afterall, these are the people most likely to know
when something is amiss. In fact, the Aircraft Owner's and Pilot's Association
has already enacted programs that protect our airports and the public. There
was no mention of this in your reporting.

Sadly, CBS news has shown very little regard for its responsibility in
reporting the news. First, you have resported to scare tactics to pump up
ratings with the tagline for the story. Second, you are spreading information
about how to potentially conduct terrorist acts to the general public. Third,
in your closing statement regarding freedoms as something to be afraid of, you
have shown little regard for the concept of personal freedom, and little
respect for the unique characteristics of American society.

I hope that CBS learns to act more responsibly when choosing the subject
matter, the tone, and the wording of its stories. Failure to act responsibly
could result in the public calling for the very same restrictions on the media
that you advocate on general aviation. The exact structure of your arguments in
today's story can be used to attack any of the freedoms this country has, as
illustrated below in a story that fortunately is fictional. I hope that I never
have to read a story such as this in the media, just as I hope to see less
biased reporting on future stories covering aviation.

Sincerely,
Eric Bartsch

-----------------------Fictional News Story
----------------------------------------

Are TV News Shows Unwitting Advocates of Terror Plots?

They are a growing trend in news programs: scare-tactic reporting about
hypothetical situations that could result in terrorist acts.

"Every country in the world has access to these media stories through the
internet and TV these days" says John Doe, a news industry expert.

Subjects include the dangers of general aviation, the usage of bioterror
weapons, nuclear hazards, and the media is free to spread these stories as they
please with no regulation whatsoever.

"There's really no security is having these ideas, along with details on how to
foil current security measures, broadcast to hundreds of millions of people"
says Doe.

And, as this journalist has discovered, that's the fear. These media programs,
like CBS news, are an open education to terrorists worldwide.

"I think it's a real concern," says John Doe. "I think it's a possibility."

There are more than 100,000,000 television sets in the United States alone, and
more than 100,000 journalists in the country. There are no regulations on
acuracy of stories, bias, or even the nature of the story itself. More
shockingly, these reporters can use scare tactics to drive up their ratings and
profitability, while at the same time spreading dangerous information or
disinformation.

Since Sept.11, 2001, the government has not ordered CBS News to make any
changes to these stories.

Would-be stories are not screened by any government agency, says John Doe.

"We haven't really implemented any kind of regulations, or even peer reviews to
ensure responsible reporting," says Doe.

Doe says he tries to keep a close watch on the media and internet, but former
FBI director Jane Smith says, that's not security.

"Homeland Security has to make policing the media a priority," says Smith.
"They've got to develop a program, and they're going to have to spend some
money on it."

He says terrorists are well aware of the media as a source of information on
vulnerabilities.

"That's where they get their idas," says Smith. "We know the terrorists watched
television and used the internet."

"We know that all of the Sept. 11 terrorists watched television in the days
before their attacks."

Some argue that there's no need to worry because terrorists could do the
research to uncover vulnerabilities themselves. But the easy access to this
information certainly makes us less safe.

"A media story on homeland security is virutally untrackable, there is no way
to know if it will suddenly be read by members of a terrorist cell, and there's
nothing we can do about it," says Smith.

After Sept. 11, a journalist at a respected media source was even demonstrating
to be fabricating his stories. Authorities tracked the impact of these stories
on public opinion but admitted they were powerless to undo the damage. Just as
they are powerless to undo the damage of scare-tactic reporting on public
opinion.

But two years later, there've been no mandated changes to ensure that the media
doesn't distribute dangerous information.

"We need to make it a real concern and deal with it and try as best we can so
that it will never happen," says Doe.

Until then, vulnerability will be the price for the freedom of the press.

[Bartscher]

I forgot to add the link to their version of the story:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/14/eveningnews/main593216.shtml

[C J Campbell]

"Bartscher" > wrote in message
...
|
| Until then, vulnerability will be the price for the freedom of the press.

It is obvious that a free press has become a greater liability than an
asset.

[Kevin McCue]

Note below does not work. It will bounce. The "insidescoop
address is good.


"Ron Lee" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
> reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
> airport security.
>
> Ron Lee

----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin McCue
To: ; ;

Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:52 PM
Subject: GA terror


Dear CBS News staff,

If you wish to provide editorial comment it should be stated as such.
Your "Eye on America" piece tonight hit a few facts then proceeded to spin
quite a yarn.
The mere fact that the terrorist have not used GA aircraft for terrorist
acts is proof that even they are smart enough to realize the very limited
usefulness of them for this purpose.
A quick physics lesson. Force equal mass times velocity. The average SUV
grosses at over 8000 lbs and is capable of over 100 mph with a cargo of at
least 2000 lbs. The average 16 year old can operate it and there are
millions on the road.
The average GA plane grosses around 2000lbs and flies just over 100 mph
with a useable payload (after pilot and fuel) of about 500lbs. Less than 1%
of the US can fly it and there are a few thousand not locked up or at
controlled airfields.
Test questions. Which would you use to cause maximum destruction?
How do you twist the truth to cause the most panic through
sensationalist drivel?
I see you got one right. I will see that some of your advertisers get
copies of this.

Kevin McCue
Tucson, AZ

[Peter]

Kevin McCue wrote:
> Note below does not work. It will bounce. The "insidescoop
> address is good.
>
>
> "Ron Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
>>reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
>>airport security.
>>
>>Ron Lee
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kevin McCue
> To: ; ;
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:52 PM
> Subject: GA terror
>
>
> Dear CBS News staff,
>
> If you wish to provide editorial comment it should be stated as such.
> Your "Eye on America" piece tonight hit a few facts then proceeded to spin
> quite a yarn.
> The mere fact that the terrorist have not used GA aircraft for terrorist
> acts is proof that even they are smart enough to realize the very limited
> usefulness of them for this purpose.
> A quick physics lesson. Force equal mass times velocity.

While I agree with your point, the physics lesson has some problems. Force
is mass times acceleration ( mass x vel. is momentum). And for the
purposes of estimating destructive capability the most relevant quantity is
generally energy, i.e. the sum of the kinetic energy of the plane and the
energy released by the cargo (bomb and/or fuel). This will still be much
greater for a loaded truck than for a small GA plane.

The average SUV
> grosses at over 8000 lbs and is capable of over 100 mph with a cargo of at
> least 2000 lbs. The average 16 year old can operate it and there are
> millions on the road.
> The average GA plane grosses around 2000lbs and flies just over 100 mph
> with a useable payload (after pilot and fuel) of about 500lbs. Less than 1%
> of the US can fly it and there are a few thousand not locked up or at
> controlled airfields.
> Test questions. Which would you use to cause maximum destruction?
> How do you twist the truth to cause the most panic through
> sensationalist drivel?

[Geoffrey Barnes]

That is very finely written, Eric. I sent my own missive to CBS today, but
it's quality pales when compared to yours. Good job!

[Eric Miller]

"Kevin McCue" <kevinwmccueATcomcast.net> wrote in message
...
>
> Note below does not work. It will bounce. The "insidescoop
> address is good.

You want

[Jordan]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:39:23 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote:

>Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
>reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
>airport security.
>
>Ron Lee

I urge everyone to email in on this one. You don't have to write an
essay just a few sentences to voice your displeasure at their poor
journalism and fear mongering. Please!

[Morgans]

> The video segment is now posted on the web at
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml
> under the title "Airport Terror Targets?"

Sickening

I have written my comments to the evening news. Have you all?
--
Jim in NC

[C J Campbell]

"Jordan" > wrote in message
...
| On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:39:23 GMT, (Ron Lee)
| wrote:
|
| >Thanks for the heads up. It is amazing that what should be a
| >reputable news organization resorts to uninformed trashing of GA
| >airport security.
| >
| >Ron Lee
|
| I urge everyone to email in on this one. You don't have to write an
| essay just a few sentences to voice your displeasure at their poor
| journalism and fear mongering. Please!

These were my few sentences:

"Gentlemen" (and I use this term very loosely):



This was the worst piece of yellow journalism I have seen in a long time.
Next I suppose you will be running a horror show on how people can just get
in their cars and drive anywhere they want.



It was once thought that a free press had the responsibility to protect the
freedoms of others. Apparently you idiots no longer believe that. Go to
Hell.



Christopher Campbell

[Jay Honeck]

> I have written my comments to the evening news. Have you all?

Perhaps posting the email address for comments would be helpful?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Damian]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 12:34:08 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> I have written my comments to the evening news. Have you all?
>
>Perhaps posting the email address for comments would be helpful?

Here's another place to contact - The Media Research Centre
http://www.mrc.org/notablequotables/bestof/2003/ for example, there's
a contact page at the bottom of the sidebar: leading to
http://www.mrc.org/contactMRC/contactMRCwelcome.asp

They are on the lookout for completely nonsensical US media analysis -
see the awards for examples !!

Damian (from UK, but glad to help)

[Dan Luke]

"C J Campbell" wrote:
> It is obvious that a free press has become a greater liability
> than an asset.

And your solution is...?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

[GP]

Go to http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/eveningnews/main3420.shtml
Click on Feedback at bottom of the page.

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> I have written my comments to the evening news. Have you all?
>
>
> Perhaps posting the email address for comments would be helpful?

[C J Campbell]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
| "C J Campbell" wrote:
| > It is obvious that a free press has become a greater liability
| > than an asset.
|
| And your solution is...?

Make it a federal offense to lie in public or (because CBS didn't actually
lie) to say anything I don't like. :-)

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bartscher" > wrote in message
> ...
> |
> | Until then, vulnerability will be the price for the freedom of the
press.
>
> It is obvious that a free press has become a greater liability than an
> asset.
>
Especially a press that confuses "liberty" with "license".

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> These were my few sentences:
>
> "Gentlemen" (and I use this term very loosely):
>
>
>
> This was the worst piece of yellow journalism I have seen in a long time.
> Next I suppose you will be running a horror show on how people can just
get
> in their cars and drive anywhere they want.
>
>
>
> It was once thought that a free press had the responsibility to protect
the
> freedoms of others. Apparently you idiots no longer believe that. Go to
> Hell.
>
>
>
> Christopher Campbell
>

Okay, CJ, tell us what you REALLY think!

[Dan Luke]

"C J Campbell" wrote:
> And your solution is...?
>
> Make it a federal offense to lie in public or (because CBS didn't
> actually lie) to say anything I don't like. :-)

Yeah, <sigh>, exactly.

I'd like to prohibit a lot of offensive stuff; I just can't think of a
universal definition of "offensive" that we could all live with.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
|
| >
|
| Okay, CJ, tell us what you REALLY think!

All right. How many times does someone have to pee in your boot before you
realize that he is not interested in becoming your friend? No matter how
nice you are to him?

Some people were so happy that they got their local affiliate to come out to
their airport and do a "response." To that I say "Pig's offal." The response
will air only in the local area, probably during the daytime soaps, and most
of the information will be edited out.

You are not going to beat the networks at their own game. Whatever they are
doing to aviation now, they have done to everybody and everything else they
have reported on in the last 20 years. Ask any landlord, doctor, or
businessman. The sole objective of network media is to destroy people for
fun and profit.

If you see a reporter, interfere with him in every way possible. Harass him.
Beat him and kick him. Smash his equipment and burn his van. Tar and feather
them all and run them out of town on a rail. That is just about what it
takes to get through to these elegant looking high school dropouts.

[Snowbird]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message >...
> Careless, clueless, insubstantial and sensational; about par for TV
> news.

Don't tell us; tell them

Better yet: tell their advertisers

[Al Gerharter]

>Ok, I admit I may have gone a bit overboard, but I had to respond to CBS on
>this one...

Not overboard at all, right on the money. Very Well Said sir. May I use
it? (With appropriate credit, of course).

My neighbor has a plane in his barn, and flies it uncontrollably out of
his field. I think he is a Baptist. Should I be worried? Do we need to put
up razor wire? What does that do to his sheep? Without x rays, we will
never know whether some of them boogers are really Al Qa'ida in sheep's
clothing.

Doesn't CBS use aircraft? Do they charter? When someone holds up the
Cookie mart in Waco Texas, does the Washington Bureau start making airline
reservations for the camera crew?

When you sow FUD, (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt), what do you reap?


Al Gerharter

[Blanche]

The problem with writing to complain about the segment probably
will NOT do what you expect. In reality, it'll confirm to the
CBS suits that sensationalism increases viewers, which is exactly
what the advertisers want.

sex sells.

If there's no sex, then blood and gore sells.

If there's no blood and gore, then fear sells. And that's
what CBS (and others) are selling today.

[Maule Driver]

"C J Campbell" > > |
> | Until then, vulnerability will be the price for the freedom of the
press.
>
> It is obvious that a free press has become a greater liability than an
> asset.

Not so obvious here.

..... but thanks for a break from the dry heaves

[Tom Sixkiller]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> ...
> |
> | >
> |
> | Okay, CJ, tell us what you REALLY think!
>
> All right. How many times does someone have to pee in your boot before you
> realize that he is not interested in becoming your friend? No matter how
> nice you are to him?
>
> Some people were so happy that they got their local affiliate to come out
to
> their airport and do a "response." To that I say "Pig's offal." The
response
> will air only in the local area, probably during the daytime soaps, and
most
> of the information will be edited out.
>
> You are not going to beat the networks at their own game. Whatever they
are
> doing to aviation now, they have done to everybody and everything else
they
> have reported on in the last 20 years. Ask any landlord, doctor, or
> businessman. The sole objective of network media is to destroy people for
> fun and profit.
>
> If you see a reporter, interfere with him in every way possible. Harass
him.
> Beat him and kick him. Smash his equipment and burn his van. Tar and
feather
> them all and run them out of town on a rail. That is just about what it
> takes to get through to these elegant looking high school dropouts.
>
I'll take that as a "Yes" vote.

[Dan Luke]

> Don't tell us; tell them

I did.

> Better yet: tell their advertisers

hmmm...that's an idea.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)