Media screws up again...

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:QDGxc.70

Thank heavens none of us are like that.

None of us get paid BIG BUCKS for

When I earned my Journalism degree in 1993, "big bucks" was something like
$17,000 a year. It's about the same now. Maybe $20K.

It's interesting watching pilots trash-talking journalists for not knowing
everything

I work in Civil Engineering and when one of our people don't the answer,
they ask around to find someone who does. It's not hard, really.

and assuming that journalists make "big bucks."

Know how much the talking heads on TV make?

There's
interesting similarities. It's one of the highest-profile and most
treacherous trades,

Yeah...so many got killed last year.

and also one of the lowest-paying.

I doubt a $20K a year journalist is very influential, which is what we were
talking about.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message newsxLxc.101

It's interesting watching pilots trash-talking journalists for not
knowing
everything

I work in Civil Engineering and when one of our people don't the answer,
they ask around to find someone who does. It's not hard, really.

Are their deadlines measured in hours or minutes like pressroom reporters
are?

and assuming that journalists make "big bucks."

Know how much the talking heads on TV make?

They make a lot, but they don't generally write the news content. That
usually comes off the AP wire from some reporter in the field who has to
file the stuff as fast as he or she possibly can. A lot of times, if they
don't file before a competitor, they don't get paid for the story which
means they may have wasted an entire day.

In fact, a crewmember of the B-17s "Outhouse Mouse" and "Nine-O-Nine" (91st
BG) said that a reporter who flew a combat mission was threatened by his
(the vet's) skipper with containment at gunpoint because he tried to bail
out over London to try to file the story first. The reporter was Walter
Cronkite.

There's
interesting similarities. It's one of the highest-profile and most
treacherous trades,

Yeah...so many got killed last year.

Gee. You are you suggesting that General Aviation is dangerous? ;

Seriously, though. You print something, even if it's TRUTH, and you hear
from lawyers threatening to sue you for thousands, tens of thousands,
millions, etc. One misprint can destroy a reporter's career or the
integrity of a publication. It's, like I said, treacherous.

and also one of the lowest-paying.

I doubt a $20K a year journalist is very influential, which is what we
were
talking about.

You'd be surprised. Is a $20K/year CFI not very influential?

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message newsxLxc.101

It's interesting watching pilots trash-talking journalists for not
knowing
everything

I work in Civil Engineering and when one of our people don't the answer,
they ask around to find someone who does. It's not hard, really.

Are their deadlines measured in hours or minutes like pressroom reporters
are?

When an entire 100 man crew is waiting....yes.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:tz4yc.31

I work in Civil Engineering and when one of our people don't the
answer,
they ask around to find someone who does. It's not hard, really.

Are their deadlines measured in hours or minutes like pressroom
reporters
are?

When an entire 100 man crew is waiting....yes.

And what is the turnaround time for an average project? Turnaround from an
actual news event to press, or air time, is measured in minutes. And the
population of viewers or readers can be measured in tens of thousands,
hundreds of thousands or millions, and the revenue lost if you're behind the
ball can be measured in same.

Here's a more direct approach. The phrase "media screw up again" because
one guy allegedly confused aerodynamic with mechanical stall would be like
the media saying "general aviators screw up again" or that flying is unsafe
because one guy augured.

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:tz4yc.31

I work in Civil Engineering and when one of our people don't the
answer,
they ask around to find someone who does. It's not hard, really.

Are their deadlines measured in hours or minutes like pressroom
reporters
are?

When an entire 100 man crew is waiting....yes.

And what is the turnaround time for an average project?

Wrong analogy.

Turnaround from an
actual news event to press, or air time, is measured in minutes.

So, their own self-imposed restriction is a child's excuse for inaccuracy?

And they wonder why their market is crashing.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:tr5yc.40

Turnaround from an
actual news event to press, or air time, is measured in minutes.

So, their own self-imposed restriction is a child's excuse for inaccuracy?

And they wonder why their market is crashing.

CNN's market is crashing?

Have you watched the news lately?

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message news:tr5yc.40

Turnaround from an
actual news event to press, or air time, is measured in minutes.

So, their own self-imposed restriction is a child's excuse for
inaccuracy?

And they wonder why their market is crashing.

CNN's market is crashing?

Have you watched the news lately?


Ummm...and their market share has been doing...what lately?

"gatt" wrote in message
...

Are their deadlines measured in hours or minutes like pressroom reporters
are?


I've often wondered why getting the story first trumped getting the story
right.

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

"gatt" wrote in message
...

Are their deadlines measured in hours or minutes like pressroom
reporters
are?


I've often wondered why getting the story first trumped getting the story
right.

Form over substance?

Early bird gets the worm?

Firstest with the mostest?

(I wonder what gatt will have to say about my use of clichés.)

If it isn't accurate, it's not NEWS...it's barely EDITORIAL.

(At least they didn't blow up the plane to make a headline, like one network
did with pickup trucks)

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
I've often wondered why getting the story first trumped getting the
story right.

Because they're rewarded by the readers/viewers for getting it first,
for one thing. Not that the trade-off described is consciously made as
often as some would have you believe.