Dick Rutan makes emergency landing in C150

[Paul kgyy]

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/DickRutan_Safe_Following_EmergencyLanding_196798-1.html

[Robert M. Gary]

On Dec 20, 10:27 am, Paul kgyy > wrote:
> http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/DickRutan_Safe_Following_Emergen...

Good thing he was so close to the ground. It would have been sad if
he'd gotten stuck up there. We've never had anyone get stuck up their
yet, we don't want to start now.

[gliderguynj]

On Dec 20, 1:27 pm, Paul kgyy > wrote:
> http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/DickRutan_Safe_Following_Emergen...

The more I learn about flying, the more I realize you don't need a
bunch of bells and whistles to make it fun. Considering all the toys
Rutan has to choose from, the fact that he flew in a C 150 says alot
about the guy. Same goes for Neil Armstrong, well known in the
gliding community for his love of flying, or all the guys and gals out
there flying Taylorcrafts, Cubs etc. Maybe if Cory Little had the
same outlook he wouldn't have become part of someone's living room.

Doug

[Robert M. Gary]

On Dec 20, 11:25 am, gliderguynj > wrote:
> On Dec 20, 1:27 pm, Paul kgyy > wrote:
>
> >http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/DickRutan_Safe_Following_Emergen...
>
> The more I learn about flying, the more I realize you don't need a
> bunch of bells and whistles to make it fun. Considering all the toys
> Rutan has to choose from, the fact that he flew in a C 150 says alot
> about the guy. Same goes for Neil Armstrong, well known in the
> gliding community for his love of flying, or all the guys and gals out
> there flying Taylorcrafts, Cubs etc. Maybe if Cory Little had the
> same outlook he wouldn't have become part of someone's living room.
>
> Doug

Cory Lidle's type of flying is fun too. Flying from New York out to
California with his CFI is a blast. Its one of the reasons I traded in
the Aeronca for a Mooney.I like to go deep into Mexico. You don't see
any Taylorcrafts that far down and at least 1/2 the planes down there
are Mooneys (probably because they have extra long legs).

-Robert

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
...
> On Dec 20, 10:27 am, Paul kgyy > wrote:
>> http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/DickRutan_Safe_Following_Emergen...
>
> Good thing he was so close to the ground. It would have been sad if
> he'd gotten stuck up there. We've never had anyone get stuck up their
> yet, we don't want to start now.

In all fairness, apparently "Daredevil pilot Dick Rutan" made some comment
about being lucky it didn't happen when he was above the clouds, but yea,
"Fortunately, he was flying below 1000 feet." is one of the dumber things
I've read from the press.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Denny]

We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?

denny <hand up>

[Marty Shapiro]

Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
:

> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
>
> denny <hand up>
>

There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who read an
report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained several
factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture of a twin
for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he was a well known
local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day safety seminar. The
first question asked of him was about the factual errors in his report.
His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is
handed to me by the editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an
error, I'll point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not going
to jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Marty Shapiro wrote:
>
> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who read an
> report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained several
> factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture of a twin
> for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he was a well known
> local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day safety seminar. The
> first question asked of him was about the factual errors in his report.
> His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is
> handed to me by the editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an
> error, I'll point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not going
> to jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."


That's fine, but from that point I'd assume he knows no better and lacks
credibility. If they handed him as report stating the earth was flat, he'd read
it that way. How can you believe a word out of his mouth when the truth has
such little importance?

I remember many years ago when 20-20 did a hatchet job on an industry I was
intimately familiar with. They neglected to report that the behaviors one
organization (the target of the report) followed were the STANDARDS OF THE
INDUSTRY. In other words, they had no story unless they wanted to castigate the
entire industry. I forever assumed if they did that to something I knew, they
did it to everybody they reported on. I never watched another show as I assume
they're all hatchet jobs.

No credibility = no viewers



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Denny wrote:
> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?


I've never bothered. I have suggested to them that before they ever ran an
aviation story, they ought to run it through their on-staff aviation expert to
make sure it made sense: their helicopter pilot. He's just a phone call away,
they already know him, and he knows flying.

Judging from the quality of their later aviation stories, they couldn't be
bothered. As a result, aircraft engines continue to stall and airplanes crash
because the pilot's medical had expired.

Is it any wonder that I take a newspaper's endorsement of a politician with a
grain of salt? They **** everything else up; why not that?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Matt Whiting]

Marty Shapiro wrote:
> Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
> :
>
>> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
>> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
>> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
>> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
>> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
>>
>> denny <hand up>
>>
>
> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who read an
> report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained several
> factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture of a twin
> for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he was a well known
> local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day safety seminar. The
> first question asked of him was about the factual errors in his report.
> His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is
> handed to me by the editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an
> error, I'll point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not going
> to jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."

That last statement also pretty much sums of my impression of
journalistic integrity.

Matt

[Gig601XLBuilder]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Marty Shapiro wrote:
>> Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
>> :
>>
>>> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
>>> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
>>> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
>>> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
>>> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
>>>
>>> denny <hand up>
>>>
>>
>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained
>> several factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture
>> of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he
>> was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day
>> safety seminar. The first question asked of him was about the factual
>> errors in his report. His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary
>> for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors. If they
>> give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll point it out to them,
>> but when I'm on the air, I am not going to jeapordize my salary by
>> altering what they hand me."
>
> That last statement also pretty much sums of my impression of
> journalistic integrity.
>
> Matt

I tend to agree with you on this but he said, "I receive a 7 figure
salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors." That
makes him an announcer not a journalist. So in my opinion he is no
different than an actor on some TV show or movie that reads lines.

I find it amazing though that any TV news anchor would say that in
public or even in private. Not that I question Denny's story at all I
just find it amazing.

At every TV station I where I ever worked the primary anchor also held
the position of managing editor, news director or some other title that
would, at least in title, give them some say over the news that was
released.

I believe all of the three major network's anchors hold the title
managing editor. At least they did when the last generation was in the
big chair.

Also, I'd like to add that that comment alone would have jeopardized the
7 figure salary of any anchor that ever worked for any news director I
ever worked for. But then I've been out of the business for, damn, 20
years now.

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:03:09 -0600, Gig601XLBuilder > wrote in >:

>Matt Whiting wrote:

>> Marty Shapiro wrote:

>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained
>>> several factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture
>>> of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he
>>> was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day
>>> safety seminar. The first question asked of him was about the factual
>>> errors in his report. His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary
>>> for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors. If they
>>> give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll point it out to them,
>>> but when I'm on the air, I am not going to jeapordize my salary by
>>> altering what they hand me."

>I find it amazing though that any TV news anchor would say that in
>public or even in private. Not that I question Denny's story at all I
>just find it amazing.

From the snippet we have--which is probably not from a transcript,
but from memory of the event--there is insufficient evidence to
condemn the newscaster.

The big questions are "What did he know and when did he know it?"

There is no reason to think that he saw the wrong picture being
displayed while he read what was handed to him. Chances are good
that he was focusing on the text, not the image. I'll be it was
a 15-to-20-second piece, at most, and that he had to be thinking
about lots of other things than fact-checking at the moment the
picture came up on screen. Who knows what other information he
may have had in his mind about the accident at the time that
the segment came up in the show? (Not us, I'd venture.)

> ... Also, I'd like to add that that comment alone would have jeopardized the
>7 figure salary of any anchor that ever worked for any news director I
>ever worked for. But then I've been out of the business for, damn, 20
>years now.

There is a chance that the talent did not say what the OP says
he said. Memory can play funny tricks on us, and we tend to
see what we want to see, to hear what we want to hear, and to
remember what we want to remember. I just proved to myself
that my recollection of a post from 2003 was false, even though
it SEEMED to me to be an accurate memory.

I'm not upset by the discrepancies between what appears in
immediate news accounts of accidents and incidents and what
is technically correct from the standpoint of trained pilots.
"Knowledge maketh a bloody entrance." It seems to me that
the reporters and readers are, on the whole, well-intentioned
and do the best they can to understand what they are hearing,
distill it, and present it to their audience. That they could
do a better job if they had the motivation and training that
pilots do goes without saying. I don't blame them for making
other choices in their lives.

Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

[Jim Logajan]

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote:
> I remember many years ago when 20-20 did a hatchet job on an industry
> I was intimately familiar with.

I'm guessing you mean their 1983 story on ultralights?

[Gig601XLBuilder]

Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:03:09 -0600, Gig601XLBuilder > wrote in >:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>>> Marty Shapiro wrote:
>
>>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained
>>>> several factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture
>>>> of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he
>>>> was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day
>>>> safety seminar. The first question asked of him was about the factual
>>>> errors in his report. His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary
>>>> for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors. If they
>>>> give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll point it out to them,
>>>> but when I'm on the air, I am not going to jeapordize my salary by
>>>> altering what they hand me."
>
>> I find it amazing though that any TV news anchor would say that in
>> public or even in private. Not that I question Denny's story at all I
>> just find it amazing.
>
> From the snippet we have--which is probably not from a transcript,
> but from memory of the event--there is insufficient evidence to
> condemn the newscaster.
>


If he said anything close to what he was quoted as saying then I stand
100% behind my statement


> The big questions are "What did he know and when did he know it?"
>
> There is no reason to think that he saw the wrong picture being
> displayed while he read what was handed to him. Chances are good
> that he was focusing on the text, not the image. I'll be it was
> a 15-to-20-second piece, at most, and that he had to be thinking
> about lots of other things than fact-checking at the moment the
> picture came up on screen. Who knows what other information he
> may have had in his mind about the accident at the time that
> the segment came up in the show? (Not us, I'd venture.)
>
>> ... Also, I'd like to add that that comment alone would have jeopardized the
>> 7 figure salary of any anchor that ever worked for any news director I
>> ever worked for. But then I've been out of the business for, damn, 20
>> years now.
>
> There is a chance that the talent did not say what the OP says
> he said. Memory can play funny tricks on us, and we tend to
> see what we want to see, to hear what we want to hear, and to
> remember what we want to remember. I just proved to myself
> that my recollection of a post from 2003 was false, even though
> it SEEMED to me to be an accurate memory.
>
> I'm not upset by the discrepancies between what appears in
> immediate news accounts of accidents and incidents and what
> is technically correct from the standpoint of trained pilots.
> "Knowledge maketh a bloody entrance." It seems to me that
> the reporters and readers are, on the whole, well-intentioned
> and do the best they can to understand what they are hearing,
> distill it, and present it to their audience. That they could
> do a better job if they had the motivation and training that
> pilots do goes without saying. I don't blame them for making
> other choices in their lives.
>
> Marty

I don't even have a problem with an anchor saying he didn't proof copy
before he read it. Happens all the time and happened to me a time or
two. My whole problem is that if the anchor said anything close to what
Denny said he said then as far as I'm concerned he stopped being a
journalist at some point and started being NOTHING but talent and as
such nobody should blame journalism for what he does anymore than you
would if an actor that was a pilot in real life and then read lines that
were given to him that said something about aviation that wasn't true.

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:38:10 -0600, Gig601XLBuilder > wrote in >:

>If he said anything close to what he was quoted as saying then I stand
>100% behind my statement

If he didn't, you'll have to revise your view. :o)

>I don't even have a problem with an anchor saying he didn't proof copy
>before he read it. Happens all the time and happened to me a time or
>two. My whole problem is that if the anchor said anything close to what
>Denny said he said ...

Yes, IF he was saying, "I knew it was wrong," there may be
something to criticize.

But IF he was saying, "I was not in a position to ad-lib
a correction on the air," that seems very understandable,
especially if the corrections were, in fact, peripheral
to the main storyline (an airplane crashed in thus-and-such
a location at thus-and-such a time).

> ... then as far as I'm concerned he stopped being a
>journalist at some point and started being NOTHING but talent and as
>such nobody should blame journalism for what he does anymore than you
>would if an actor that was a pilot in real life and then read lines that
>were given to him that said something about aviation that wasn't true.

We agree that the field of journalism should not be held
accountable for what individual journalists do or fail
to do. Every source should be evaluated on its own
merits.

Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

[Jim Stewart]

Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
> Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:03:09 -0600, Gig601XLBuilder
>> > wrote in
>> >:
>>
>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>>> Marty Shapiro wrote:
>>
>>>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>>>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report
>>>>> contained several factual errors about the incident, among which
>>>>> was the picture of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved.
>>>>> The irony was he was a well known local pilot. About a week later,
>>>>> he MCed an all day safety seminar. The first question asked of him
>>>>> was about the factual errors in his report. His response was "I
>>>>> receive a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is handed to me
>>>>> by the editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an
>>>>> error, I'll point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not
>>>>> going to jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."
>>
>>> I find it amazing though that any TV news anchor would say that in
>>> public or even in private. Not that I question Denny's story at all I
>>> just find it amazing.
>>
>> From the snippet we have--which is probably not from a transcript,
>> but from memory of the event--there is insufficient evidence to
>> condemn the newscaster.
>>
>
>
> If he said anything close to what he was quoted as saying then I stand
> 100% behind my statement

There's an axiom in the business...

If a media type is writing a magazine article, they may get it right.
Writing a newspaper article, they won't get it right.
Has a TV camera on their shoulder, run in the opposite direction as fast
as you can.

[Marty Shapiro]

Gig601XLBuilder > wrote in
:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> Marty Shapiro wrote:
>>> Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
>>> :
>>>
>>>> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
>>>> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
>>>> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
>>>> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
>>>> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
>>>>
>>>> denny <hand up>
>>>>
>>>
>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report contained
>>> several factual errors about the incident, among which was the picture
>>> of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The irony was he
>>> was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he MCed an all day
>>> safety seminar. The first question asked of him was about the factual
>>> errors in his report. His response was "I receive a 7 figure salary
>>> for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors. If they
>>> give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll point it out to them,
>>> but when I'm on the air, I am not going to jeapordize my salary by
>>> altering what they hand me."
>>
>> That last statement also pretty much sums of my impression of
>> journalistic integrity.
>>
>> Matt
>
> I tend to agree with you on this but he said, "I receive a 7 figure
> salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors." That
> makes him an announcer not a journalist. So in my opinion he is no
> different than an actor on some TV show or movie that reads lines.
>
> I find it amazing though that any TV news anchor would say that in
> public or even in private. Not that I question Denny's story at all I
> just find it amazing.
>
> At every TV station I where I ever worked the primary anchor also held
> the position of managing editor, news director or some other title that
> would, at least in title, give them some say over the news that was
> released.
>
> I believe all of the three major network's anchors hold the title
> managing editor. At least they did when the last generation was in the
> big chair.
>
> Also, I'd like to add that that comment alone would have jeopardized the
> 7 figure salary of any anchor that ever worked for any news director I
> ever worked for. But then I've been out of the business for, damn, 20
> years now.

When was the last time the anchor at a major TV station actually went into
the field as a reporter? Years ago that was still done, but at any network
station in a major market today do any of the anchors ever go out an cover
a story any more? I don't think so. They have become actors who just read
the news. Once they stop covering stories and just read them, they have
stopped being journalists.

20 years ago, anchors did still cover stories and were reporters, editors,
etc., especially at the smaller stations and to a lesser extent, but still
to some extent, at the major stations. Are the news departments today
still independent or do they report to the entertainment department?

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

[Gig601XLBuilder]

Marty Shapiro wrote:

>
> When was the last time the anchor at a major TV station actually went into
> the field as a reporter? Years ago that was still done, but at any network
> station in a major market today do any of the anchors ever go out an cover
> a story any more? I don't think so. They have become actors who just read
> the news. Once they stop covering stories and just read them, they have
> stopped being journalists.
>
> 20 years ago, anchors did still cover stories and were reporters, editors,
> etc., especially at the smaller stations and to a lesser extent, but still
> to some extent, at the major stations. Are the news departments today
> still independent or do they report to the entertainment department?
>

I watch both LA and NY network station's local news from time to time
off the dish. I've seen virtually all of the anchors out "in the field"
from time to time, usually during sweeps.

All the major network's news departments are still independent at least
in name and none answer to entertainment though they are not as
independent from management as they once were.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Jim Logajan wrote:
> "Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote:
>> I remember many years ago when 20-20 did a hatchet job on an industry
>> I was intimately familiar with.
>
> I'm guessing you mean their 1983 story on ultralights?


Nah, it was on decompression tables and PADI (Professional Association of Diving
Instructors). PADI was using tables based directly on the USN decompression
schedules.... as was every other diving organization on the planet at the time.
The "scandal" was that the tables weren't perfect. Of course, everybody knew
there was some risk attached to them... but there was nothing better at the
time.

Total bull****.


--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "Gig" == Gig601XLBuilder > writes:

Gig> I tend to agree with you on this but he said, "I receive a 7
Gig> figure salary for reading the news that is handed to me by
Gig> the editors." That makes him an announcer not a
Gig> journalist. So in my opinion he is no different than an actor
Gig> on some TV show or movie that reads lines.

Which is why I prefer to watch to Spanish language TV stations for
news. First, they cover a lot of important stuff that never appears on
mainstream TV. Second, they make no pretense about their anchors
having any talent or status so generally hire good-looking tarts that
can speak well. Makes for more pleasant viewing.

Working in California's capital, I laugh at the lengths the TV
stations go to have their blow-dried anchors do a "report" in front of
the Capitol Building...just so the viewers can be deceived into
thinking said anchor did some investigation, I suppose. Jeez they
should film some standard important-building-during-different-seasons
backgrounds and photoshop their anchors in front of it. Would save a
lot of money.
--
Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates
in the country.
~ Marion Barry, former mayor Washington D.C.

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "MS" == Mortimer Schnerd <Mortimer> writes:

MS> As a result, aircraft engines continue
MS> to stall and airplanes crash because the pilot's medical had
MS> expired.

This is flat BS and proves you don't know squat about flying. The
crashes happen because the reckless pilots fail to file flight plans.
--
Whenever anyone says "I can't," it makes me wish he'd get stung
to death by about ten thousand bees. When he says "I'll try,"
five thousand bees. ("I can," one bee.)
- Jack Handey

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Bob Fry wrote:
>>>>>> "MS" == Mortimer Schnerd <Mortimer> writes:
>
>> As a result, aircraft engines continue
>> to stall and airplanes crash because the pilot's medical had
>> expired.
>
> This is flat BS and proves you don't know squat about flying. The
> crashes happen because the reckless pilots fail to file flight plans.


I stand corrected.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Matt Whiting]

Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> Marty Shapiro wrote:
>>> Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
>>> :
>>>
>>>> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
>>>> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
>>>> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
>>>> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
>>>> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
>>>>
>>>> denny <hand up>
>>>>
>>>
>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report
>>> contained several factual errors about the incident, among which was
>>> the picture of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The
>>> irony was he was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he
>>> MCed an all day safety seminar. The first question asked of him was
>>> about the factual errors in his report. His response was "I receive
>>> a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the
>>> editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll
>>> point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not going to
>>> jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."
>>
>> That last statement also pretty much sums of my impression of
>> journalistic integrity.
>>
>> Matt
>
> I tend to agree with you on this but he said, "I receive a 7 figure
> salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors." That
> makes him an announcer not a journalist. So in my opinion he is no
> different than an actor on some TV show or movie that reads lines.

You make a good point, but I don't think the general public makes a
distinction between announcer and journalist and I don't much either.
The person on the tube is the "face of journalism" to me and I haven't
been addressed since Cronkite and his generation retired.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Bob Fry wrote:
>>>>>> "MS" == Mortimer Schnerd <Mortimer> writes:
>
> MS> As a result, aircraft engines continue
> MS> to stall and airplanes crash because the pilot's medical had
> MS> expired.
>
> This is flat BS and proves you don't know squat about flying. The
> crashes happen because the reckless pilots fail to file flight plans.

No, the failure to file a flight plan is what caused the engine to
stall. It was the engine "stall" that caused the crash. :-)

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>> Marty Shapiro wrote:
>>>> Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal arts
>>>>> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
>>>>> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
>>>>> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
>>>>> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
>>>>>
>>>>> denny <hand up>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
>>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report
>>>> contained several factual errors about the incident, among which was
>>>> the picture of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The
>>>> irony was he was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he
>>>> MCed an all day safety seminar. The first question asked of him was
>>>> about the factual errors in his report. His response was "I receive
>>>> a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the
>>>> editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll
>>>> point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not going to
>>>> jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."
>>>
>>> That last statement also pretty much sums of my impression of
>>> journalistic integrity.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>> I tend to agree with you on this but he said, "I receive a 7 figure
>> salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors." That
>> makes him an announcer not a journalist. So in my opinion he is no
>> different than an actor on some TV show or movie that reads lines.
>
> You make a good point, but I don't think the general public makes a
> distinction between announcer and journalist and I don't much either.
> The person on the tube is the "face of journalism" to me and I haven't
> been addressed since Cronkite and his generation retired.

That was supposed to be impressed, not addressed! I don't know where
that came from...

Matt

[Jim Macklin]

Cronkite was the propagandist that lost the war in VN, of course he worked
for CBS rather than CNN, but the C still means the same thing.


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
| Matt Whiting wrote:
| > Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
| >> Matt Whiting wrote:
| >>> Marty Shapiro wrote:
| >>>> Denny > wrote in news:7e60896b-29ad-4df9-b10e-
| >>>> :
| >>>>
| >>>>> We can snicker all we want at the clueless reporting of a liberal
arts
| >>>>> major, low man on the totem pole, who gets sent to report on general
| >>>>> aviation - but how many of us have contacted the paqper and the tv
| >>>>> station and offered to take the general news reporter(s) flying on a
| >>>>> saturday afternoon so we can teach them the basics?
| >>>>>
| >>>>> denny <hand up>
| >>>>>
| >>>>
| >>>> There was an newscaster in the Bay area many years ago who
| >>>> read an report about a GA incident on the air. This report
| >>>> contained several factual errors about the incident, among which was
| >>>> the picture of a twin for the single engine aircraft involved. The
| >>>> irony was he was a well known local pilot. About a week later, he
| >>>> MCed an all day safety seminar. The first question asked of him was
| >>>> about the factual errors in his report. His response was "I receive
| >>>> a 7 figure salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the
| >>>> editors. If they give me advance copy and I notice an error, I'll
| >>>> point it out to them, but when I'm on the air, I am not going to
| >>>> jeapordize my salary by altering what they hand me."
| >>>
| >>> That last statement also pretty much sums of my impression of
| >>> journalistic integrity.
| >>>
| >>> Matt
| >>
| >> I tend to agree with you on this but he said, "I receive a 7 figure
| >> salary for reading the news that is handed to me by the editors." That
| >> makes him an announcer not a journalist. So in my opinion he is no
| >> different than an actor on some TV show or movie that reads lines.
| >
| > You make a good point, but I don't think the general public makes a
| > distinction between announcer and journalist and I don't much either.
| > The person on the tube is the "face of journalism" to me and I haven't
| > been addressed since Cronkite and his generation retired.
|
| That was supposed to be impressed, not addressed! I don't know where
| that came from...
|
| Matt