View Single Post
  #6  
Old August 18th 05, 03:54 AM
Jim Burns
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ah Jay, you're right, I wasn't being fair... it was all meant tongue in
cheek. I've actually been impressed with some of the TV networks that hunt
down their own reporters who are pilots to get their informed opinion.
Usually these pilots give a fairly intelligent accounting and are usually
quick to point out when they are speculating. 9 times out of 10 I'll try to
look up their certificates on the FAA database.

What I can't stand is when reporters use technical terms of a subject that
they have no knowledge and then churn them out pretending as if they know
what the H they are talking about WITHOUT so much as a casual attempt of
verifying the correct usage of such terms through another source than that
which had given them the term to begin with.

This "non-verification" is the crime because it fools the uninformed or
unfamiliar public into thinking "Well, she used those big terms...
glideslope and such.... and those initials, ILS... that must be pretty
important... it sure sounds like she knows what she's talking about." I
just think that, especially in type media where time may not be such a
factor, a reporter has the responsibility to insure that the terminology is
correct so that their readers or viewers are informed and educated rather
than simply entertained. Think about everything this person could have
learned by looking up an ILS in the AIM before she wrote her story. It
would have taken all of 5 minutes. She could have even mentioned something
about what a pilot is supposed to do if one part of the ILS System is not
functional or becomes erratic, rather than leaving the reader or viewer to
believe that doom is eminent in such situations.

You're right that a reporter doesn't and shouldn't be required to have more
than the basic knowledge of aviation, or of any other subject for that
matter. I don't expect them to be experts. I just wish they didn't act
like they were.

Jim


"Jay Beckman" wrote in message
news:9KPMe.60890$E95.11876@fed1read01...
"Jim Burns" wrote in message
...
Makes 'ya think that they forgot to stay at a Holiday Inn Express last
night, doesn't it? Ah, but they rode on an airplane once. And they saw

a
control tower. Everybody knows that the guys in the tower help those

poor
pilots find the airport and the runway when the weather is bad, after

all,
we all heard it on the news or read it in the paper.

I feel sorry for reporters. So many complicated subjects and simply not
enough time to get it right, besides everybody knows that reporters are
smarter than John Q Public, right? And, if you're not smart enough to

be
a
reporter, you can always be an editor. Just make sure there is enough
techno-babble intermixed in the story to make the reporter sound as

smart
as
the editor.

So.... when an airplane stalls, we all know it's engine quits (we've all
read it, right?).... does an airplane on a GLIDE slope have to become a
glider? or shut it's engines down? does an airplane stall when it hit's
the
glideslope? Tell me Miss/Mr Wise Reporter... curious minds want to

know.
Jim



I don't belive this is entirely fair,

We take the time to get proper training to fly and (smart pilots) continue
their education at every turn via magazines, books, software, the web,
additonal ratings, refresher courses, BFRs...etc. Basic flying may not be
brain surgery, but it takes a little bit of "something" to do it at all

and
maybe even more of that "something" to do it well.

Beginning to Intermediate electronic journalists (in the USA) have only
three tests to pass:

- Can you communicate in English?
- Can you do so in as concise a manner as possible?
- Can you look good doing it?

But unless you have a reporter who is an instrument-rated pilot, the
expectation that anyone in the newsroom of a local TV station will have
anything more than very bare boned knowledge about modern avionics is

(IMO)
an unrealistic expectation.

Local TV stations just can't afford to keep a "Science Editor" or

"Aviation
Reporter" on staff.

It's quite possible that the reporter simply regurgitated the basics of
flying an ILS exactly as they were explained to her. Garbage In - Garbage
Out. Or put another way: Dumbed Down In - Dumbed Down Even More Out.

Hell, even Miles O'Brien proved that sometimes the frenzy to get it on the
air first can lead even the most aviation-savvy network-level reporter to
make the occassional wild-ass guess as he did with the cause of that Air
France wreck in Toronto and the fate of those aboard.

Take it with a grain of salt. And if it really offends your sensabilities
that much, then craft a letter to the editor and educate them. I bet

they'd
appreciate it. Who knows, you might get a call to go on the air as a

local
aviation expert. Just try not to freeze up when the red light comes

on...!

Jay Beckman - PP/ASEL
Arizona Cloudbusters
Chandler, AZ