Time Magazine Article "What's causing ATC delays"

Hey all - I'm mostly a lurker but felt compelled to comment on this.

Time Magazine recently had an incredibly asinine piece on "What's
causing flight delays." In it the writer blames the old ATC system,
but barely gives word to busy hub airports, overscheduled/canceled
flights, and a host of other LOCAL AIRPORT and AIRLINE problems that
are really to blame. And of course adding a one line jab about GA.

Plus - the animation showing a plane being bounced around the sky like
a pinball is hilarious, and just plane incorrect.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...653304,00.html

I wrote a rebuttal on my blog: Would love any comments/corrections or
opinions

http://www.futuregringo.com/index.ph...travel-delays/

Summary: Instead of whining about zig zag patterns in the sky we
should invest the money in people, resources (such as ground radar,)
and improvements in the LOCAL airport environments at our largest
hubs. The TOWER is where air traffic controllers are overworked,
overtaxed, and because of this have increased chances of errors. Why
are people being told, or sold, a false worry about the LEAST
problematic and least dangerous part of our ATC system?

Just another example of why the news media have lost the
respect of the American people. Will they ever wake up?






On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:48:11 -0700, james wrote:

Hey all - I'm mostly a lurker but felt compelled to comment on this.

Time Magazine recently had an incredibly asinine piece on "What's
causing flight delays." In it the writer blames the old ATC system,
but barely gives word to busy hub airports, overscheduled/canceled
flights, and a host of other LOCAL AIRPORT and AIRLINE problems that
are really to blame. And of course adding a one line jab about GA.

"muzzy" wrote in message
...
Just another example of why the news media have lost the
respect of the American people. Will they ever wake up?


Not likely, but remember that in their world, truth is relative and
subjective -- they see nothing wrong.

The word is: insolence.

On Aug 30, 10:48 am, james wrote:
Hey all - I'm mostly a lurker but felt compelled to comment on this.

Time Magazine recently had an incredibly asinine piece on "What's
causing flight delays." In it the writer blames the old ATC system,
but barely gives word to busy hub airports, overscheduled/canceled
flights, and a host of other LOCAL AIRPORT and AIRLINE problems that
are really to blame. And of course adding a one line jab about GA.

Plus - the animation showing a plane being bounced around the sky like
a pinball is hilarious, and just plane incorrect.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...653304,00.html

I wrote a rebuttal on my blog: Would love any comments/corrections or
opinions

http://www.futuregringo.com/index.ph...agazine-studie...

Summary: Instead of whining about zig zag patterns in the sky we
should invest the money in people, resources (such as ground radar,)
and improvements in the LOCAL airport environments at our largest
hubs. The TOWER is where air traffic controllers are overworked,
overtaxed, and because of this have increased chances of errors. Why
are people being told, or sold, a false worry about the LEAST
problematic and least dangerous part of our ATC system?


"and just plane incorrect."

Oh and that was a typo not an intended pun.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"muzzy" wrote in message
Just another example of why the news media have lost the
respect of the American people. Will they ever wake up?

At the risk of going totally off-topic, at what point has the news media had
the respect of the American people?

Having said that, I expect a much greater degree of accuracy and research
from the weekly news magazines than I would the average daily newspaper.
Daily reporters face pretty fierce deadlines for which it's often impossible
to check every fact and detail, but when you're a major international news
magazine, that excuse isn't valid.

-c

"Gattman" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"muzzy" wrote in message
Just another example of why the news media have lost the
respect of the American people. Will they ever wake up?

At the risk of going totally off-topic, at what point has the news media
had the respect of the American people?

Up until the 80's when alternative media came into being and the blatent
dishonesty, hypocrisy and slovenlyness became known.


Having said that, I expect a much greater degree of accuracy and research
from the weekly news magazines than I would the average daily newspaper.

Like Newsweek or Time? False expectation, I'm afraid.

Daily reporters face pretty fierce deadlines for which it's often
impossible to check every fact and detail, but when you're a major
international news magazine, that excuse isn't valid.

The issue isn't accuracy/fact checking, but deliberate distortion. For so
long the MSM had no competition and thus virtually no one to answer to.

An America with short attention spans, poor memory, and a dearth of critical
thinking skills hasn't helped to keep them on their toes, either.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

At the risk of going totally off-topic, at what point has the news media
had the respect of the American people?

Up until the 80's when alternative media came into being and the blatent
dishonesty, hypocrisy and slovenlyness became known.

Well, I have to disagree somewhat because public issues with the media go
back at least to the coverage of Vietnam. Can't remember how it faired
during World War II, but previous to that the respect factor would have more
to do with the cluefullness (lack thereof) of the public than the accuracy
of the media (lack thereof.) My point is that if you study the history of
mass media in the United States you won't find a period in which they were
particularly respected except by their own readers. Exceptions going back
to the 19th century include The Oregonian, The Chigaco Tribune and the New
York Times, but they weren't without sin either.

Recall Abraham Lincoln's marginally-constitutional imprisonment of several
critical publishers.

An America with short attention spans, poor memory, and a dearth of
critical thinking skills hasn't helped to keep them on their toes,
either.

Unfortunately, I can't disagree. I studied Journalism at OSU under an
two-time Pulizer prize winner who required all J students to have a science
minor because he was tired of hearing about bigfoot, killer bees, Alar and
other cyclical and nonsensical media phenomena. (My senior thesis was to
interpret scientific data on the dietary benefits of oat fiber versus wheat
bran, back when everybody was reporting that one or the other prevented hear
disease. Turns out there's not a signifcant difference.)

We live and will always live in a world where some amount of people believe
whatever they read. The only variable is what they choose to read, whether
it's USA Today, the Wall Street Journal or Moron.org

-c

"Gattman" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

At the risk of going totally off-topic, at what point has the news media
had the respect of the American people?

Up until the 80's when alternative media came into being and the blatent
dishonesty, hypocrisy and slovenlyness became known.

Well, I have to disagree somewhat because public issues with the media go
back at least to the coverage of Vietnam.

Probably, and even further, but were the issues about Vietnam coverage known
THEN, or was it something that came later. The first real damning coverage
came IIRC, after Giap's book was published.

Can't remember how it faired during World War II, but previous to that
the respect factor would have more to do with the cluefullness (lack
thereof) of the public than the accuracy of the media (lack thereof.) My
point is that if you study the history of mass media in the United States
you won't find a period in which they were particularly respected except
by their own readers. Exceptions going back to the 19th century include
The Oregonian, The Chigaco Tribune and the New York Times, but they
weren't without sin either.

Funny you mention the Chicago Tribune, because (it they're the paper I'm
thinking of) they published confidential information during WWII.

I recall reading about some of the hysteria directed at Thomas Jefferson.


Recall Abraham Lincoln's marginally-constitutional imprisonment of several
critical publishers.

Yes, and John Adams "Sedition Act".


An America with short attention spans, poor memory, and a dearth of
critical thinking skills hasn't helped to keep them on their toes,
either.

Unfortunately, I can't disagree. I studied Journalism at OSU under an
two-time Pulizer prize winner who required all J students to have a
science minor because he was tired of hearing about bigfoot, killer bees,
Alar and other cyclical and nonsensical media phenomena. (My senior
thesis was to interpret scientific data on the dietary benefits of oat
fiber versus wheat bran, back when everybody was reporting that one or the
other prevented hear disease. Turns out there's not a signifcant
difference.)

Hell, see what they did with the "Nutrition Pyramid" even as little as a
couple years ago, or the "Eight glasses of water a day" tripe :~)

We live and will always live in a world where some amount of people
believe whatever they read.

"I only know what I read in the newspapers" -- Will Rogers.

or

(Insert strong scottish accent here) "Do ya dare to disbelieve it if it's in
PRINNNT" -- Jock Hutchison

The only variable is what they choose to read, whether it's USA Today,
the Wall Street Journal or Moron.org

Yes, the "single-sourcers", never cross-checking...

First, they said newspapers would open the world to us and make us smarter,
then they said TV would open the world to us and make us smarter.

Right, Dude!!!

I think the MSM hit the skids when they had to compete with TV for the short
American attention span. It then became the dog chasing its tail. It only
got worse when, like anyone in power, they started believing their own BS in
the manner that other elites believe their own PR pronouncements.

What we see now is desperation on a precarious stage.

"Gattman" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...


We live and will always live in a world where some amount of people
believe whatever they read. The only variable is what they choose to
read, whether it's USA Today, the Wall Street Journal or Moron.org


Addendum to previous post coming down the wi

I do, though, trust the MSM and even the newspapers when it comes to the
baseball box scores.


--
Matt Barrow
Performance Homes, LLC.
Cheyenne, WY

In rec.aviation.piloting, on Thu 30 Aug 2007 06:55:29p, "Gattman"
wrote:

Unfortunately, I can't disagree. I studied Journalism at OSU under an
two-time Pulizer prize winner who required all J students to have a
science minor because he was tired of hearing about bigfoot, killer
bees, Alar and other cyclical and nonsensical media phenomena. (My
senior thesis was to interpret scientific data on the dietary benefits
of oat fiber versus wheat bran, back when everybody was reporting that
one or the other prevented hear disease. Turns out there's not a
signifcant difference.)

So, does Big Foot prefer oat or wheat bran and does he like killer bee
honey on it?