Media screws up again...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:KAsxc.352$

Stall = Engine stall?? Why do they always seem to screw this up??

For the same reason they screw up most topics -- they feel compelled to
comment about things of which they are completely clueless.

Yes. It's their job. Reporters are generally expected to know everything.
The expectation comes from those who believe that they themselves already
do.

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

Yes. It's their job. Reporters are generally expected to know everything.


Really? By whom?



The expectation comes from those who believe that they themselves already
do.


Hmmm..... Why would such people pay any attention to reporters?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
k.net...

Yes. It's their job. Reporters are generally expected to know
everything.

Really? By whom?

Ever edited a magazine and fielded complaints from, well, everybody?
Believe me; you make a mistake, or you're -perceived- to have made a
mistake, you're going to hear about it from the public. And it's always
prefaced with something like "hey, idiot."

The expectation comes from those who believe that they themselves
already
do.

Hmmm..... Why would such people pay any attention to reporters?

Because despite the arrogance and pomposity of much of the general public,
they still read newspapers, read news magazines, read web news and watch
news television.

That's why.

-c

"Sam" ha scritto nel messaggio
om...
Here's the link:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...94/detail.html

Stall = Engine stall?? Why do they always seem to screw this up??


Quote: "The landing gear was down, the propeller was turning. It doesn't
make a lot of sense to me why he was making an emergency landing, whoever
was flying," McKenna said.


Well... wasn't it so that during an engine failure the prop doesn't always
stop turning? ...

-Manuel
PPL(A) SEP

Sam wrote:

Here's the link:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...94/detail.html

Stall = Engine stall?? Why do they always seem to screw this up??

You know, if you reread the story, you'll see that it appears it wasn't
the reporter who made the error:

"Flight simulator technician Scott McKenna of Platteville said he saw
the plane appear to descend for an emergency landing when it slowed down
too much and the wing dipped. The pilot overcorrected and the engine
stalled, he said. The plane headed nose down, cartwheeled and landed on
its belly, McKenna said."

Assuming the attribution is correct, it was the source who got it wrong.
On the other hand, the reporter may have misinterpreted his statement.
Either way, don't you think it would be more productive to write to the
site and educate the reporter than just bitch about it?

"Rich Ahrens" wrote in message news:40c87dd2$0$90559

Assuming the attribution is correct, it was the source who got it wrong.
On the other hand, the reporter may have misinterpreted his statement.
Either way, don't you think it would be more productive to write to the
site and educate the reporter than just bitch about it?

WELL SAID! THANK YOU!

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Rich Ahrens" wrote in message news:40c87dd2$0$90559

Assuming the attribution is correct, it was the source who got it wrong.
On the other hand, the reporter may have misinterpreted his statement.
Either way, don't you think it would be more productive to write to the
site and educate the reporter than just bitch about it?

WELL SAID! THANK YOU!

So why is that entire industry so impervious to correcting it's major fault?

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:wC4yc.33

Assuming the attribution is correct, it was the source who got it
wrong.
On the other hand, the reporter may have misinterpreted his
statement.
Either way, don't you think it would be more productive to write to
the
site and educate the reporter than just bitch about it?

WELL SAID! THANK YOU!

So why is that entire industry so impervious to correcting it's major
fault?

It's interesting hearing comments from people who say that anybody can be a
journalist, who themselves don't even have a high school-level grasp of
their own language. There is no apostrophe in "its major fault." "It's"
is a contraction of "it is."

Now, addressing what Rich was getting at: Rather than bitching on amUsenet,
have you actually bothered to correct a reporter or editor who misused the
term? And, it turns out, the reporter in this case merely reported the
information as it was given to him. So, if the subject were to be targetted
accurately it should read "Aviation industry screws up again," which makes
about as much sense.

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:wC4yc.33

Assuming the attribution is correct, it was the source who got it
wrong.
On the other hand, the reporter may have misinterpreted his
statement.
Either way, don't you think it would be more productive to write to
the
site and educate the reporter than just bitch about it?

WELL SAID! THANK YOU!

So why is that entire industry so impervious to correcting it's major
fault?

It's interesting hearing comments from people who say that anybody can be
a
journalist, who themselves don't even have a high school-level grasp of
their own language. There is no apostrophe in "its major fault." "It's"
is a contraction of "it is."

Geez...when your face is shoved into a toilet, don't hit the handle.

Don't get all pompous that if we can't write like an expert, we can't
comment.

Take that attitude (so commonplace in your field) and stick it where the sun
doesn't shine.


Now, addressing what Rich was getting at: Rather than bitching on
amUsenet,
have you actually bothered to correct a reporter or editor who misused the
term?

I've sent letters to the papers about major mistakes in facts (I don't
bother correcting their gramatical erros which are numerous) and got
NOTHING.

AAMOF, there's a website dedicated just to correcting errors in the NY Times
economic reporting.

Guess what their response is.

And, it turns out, the reporter in this case merely reported the
information as it was given to him. So, if the subject were to be
targetted
accurately it should read "Aviation industry screws up again," which makes
about as much sense.

Okay...here's a clue about the media: they don't report, they pontificate.
They are impervious to correction. They promote themselves (virtually) as
experts in every field.

And they wonder why their credibility is diminishing by the hour.

I understand your concern for your industry, but like so many other facets
of life, they're their own worst enemy. And
making childish excuses only exacerbate the problem.

Tom
--
Real science doesn't work on consensus.
It works on contention. When a new fact
is announced, it is attacked voraciously
from all sides and corners. If it holds up,
and proves to be true, it is then, and only
then, accepted as a fact.

With real science, you don't need
consensus. Only facts.

gatt wrote:

And, it turns out, the reporter in this case merely reported the
information as it was given to him.

Or the reporter misread his shorthand notes on the interview, or the editor decided
to "correct" an obvious mistake, or ....

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.