Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:39:12 -0700, Gatt wrote:

CNN has a few pilots on its staff that they consult whenever there's
an accident. That's useful. Plus, it adds a -lot- of credibility to
that news outlet. Unfortunately, most reporters don't make nearly
enough money to dump into an aviation hobby.

I've often wondered this, and you seem to be a person to ask: why not
have a stable of experts on particular topics for content checking
when appropriate? They'd not be journalists, but people to whom
journalists could turn for content/terminology/fact checking in
various areas of enterprise.

Somehow, I became the person one particular reporter called for
Internet-related stories. I was happy to spend the few minutes
occasionally required simply to be sure that stories were accurate. I
expect that there are plenty of people in any field with a similar
motive.

- Andrew


I'm not answering for Gatt but when I was a TV reporter I did have a number
of people I would call if I had time. These were all unpaid people I knew
because in a small market there isn't the budget to have experts in any
fields on retainer much less all fields.

BUT.... I didn't have the internet back then that if I were in the business
now it would allow me to check on just about any topic at virtually no cost.

CNN, ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC do have people they can call and the internet and
they still get it wrong. It is sad.