Aviationwiz From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 964 posts, RR: 3 Posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11247 times:
I'm really annoyed by the media, and even people in general, about how whenever there is a crash, everyone jumps on saying that it was due to terrorism. In all cases, it most likely is *NOT* due to terrorism, but just human error, mechanical, technical problems, and what not. Anyone else find it ridiculous that when we hear about this, it always sounds like:
"A plane in *country name* today crashed with *number* people aboard. Experts have ruled out the possibility of terrorism."
Give me some real information, not that terrorism was ruled out!
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11184 times:
Until the facts are reported from a full investigation many months down the road, you are right in that terrorism in some form or fashion simply like anything else to include an alien air-air kill cannot be ruled out.
The media in Cyprus were telling this in the first reports about the accident, midday, just because the crews of the F-16's that followed the Helios Airways B737 before its crash, reported that they saw someone with mask on, in the cockpit (probably a crew member with an oxygen mask), were the unconscious co-pilot laid. After some time and after driving people mad with stupid terrorism speculations, they contradicted their previous comments as being not-valid in the end.
All this is a result of the worldwide terror, being preserved and fueled by the media all over the world if you ask me. We are afraid of our own shadows…
AsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11051 times:
MSNBC, CNN, Fox News...they mention the "T" word too quickly and get people all excited. A truck crashes on the freeway and one of the first things they say is, "It's undetermined if this was an act of terrorism." It's a good, old-fashioned crash for God's sake.
What next? Paris Hilton trips over her rat dog and skins her knobby knee. "We're not sure if it's an act of terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security could not be reached for comment."
HZ747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1995 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10992 times:
Actually, the first report I heard the word was only mentioned as an unlikely cause. In this case it was CNN Interntional--I think now the reactionaries are the over-reactors and the media was the sane ones. In fact, there were more immediate comparisons right away to the Payne Stewart corporate jet crash--but then again, other than CNN, most of my sources for news were Australian.
Let me add that the US too is the only nation to experience horrific deliberate air crashes as a result of terrorism in an event that shook the nation to its core. If the media jumps the gun now and then, I will allow it--for most people, especially those working downtown in NYC--air crashes will always immediately be linked to terrorism first, everything else second.
In Sri Lanka the Tamil Tigers blew up the planes while they were empty. In the 70's, Palestinians emptied the planes then blew them up with grenades. While great images for TV, in terms of impact on humanity, they were a lot less harmful.
David L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9638 posts, RR: 41
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10844 times:
I agree but the first mention I heard of terrorism in the Helios crash was here! Every time there's an accident, there are always those who devise a theory then try to get the facts to fit it - terrorism happens to be the "in" thing. OK, there could be all sorts of reasons but doesn't it make sense to start with the most likely causes?
Xr8FordGirl From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10771 times:
"What next? Paris Hilton trips over her rat dog and skins her knobby knee. "We're not sure if it's an act of terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security could not be reached for comment."
The whole "T" thining is rediculous now with the media claiming it's terrorism everytime there's a problem. It's like it's the new scapegoat for everything from Paris Hiltons continued existence to Tom Cruise making any more films.(which may well be true)
It's one thing to start with and remove the most likely causes and to a degree I can understand that need because it's logical but that's for the investigators to determine. It's the media that constantly scream the "T" word evertime something happens that is getting rediculous.
JBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2482 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10709 times:
The media feels like they constantly need to "reassure" us that these aircraft incidents aren't terror-related. Why? Either they think we're still "paranoid" or they're trying to keep us "paranoid" so we still keep drinking the terror paranoia Kool-Aid
Yes, terror is just a threat here as everywhere else, but there's no point in being paranoid about it. Accept it and move on.
To the media: If it wasn't terror related, then don't mention it.
I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
David L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9638 posts, RR: 41
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10688 times:
Quoting Xr8FordGirl (Reply 8): It's the media that constantly scream the "T" word evertime something happens
And some people here - it happened with the Air France crash in Toronto, too, and then we get the claims that it's everyone's right to discuss all possibilities without anyone labelling their claims as outrageous. Ah, the internet - can't live with it, can't live without it!
ZakHH From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10681 times:
Terrorism sells. As mentioned earlier, the newslady on German news channel "n24" knew for sure that a technical background could be ruled out and the only possible explanation was that someone entered the cockpit and killed the pilots. Brilliant, I would say.
But not only playing the "T"-card is what annoys me, also the constant mentioning of the absence of a terroristic background for every sack of rice that is dropped in China. I really wonder when the first weatherman will tell us that there is no evidence for a terroristic background behind our rainy summer this year...
Xr8FordGirl From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 10545 times:
I always thought Englands rainy summers were suspicious it's a terrorist plot to disrupt the organised loafing.....*whipsers* Australia really doen't like loosing the Ashes you see*
The problem is it's getting to rediculous proportions and you know it's getting that way when they initally suggested Columbia may have been terrorist related as opposed to the really obvious foam block that came off during the launch, but suggested it was by the print media certainly. Not sure if it made it to tv but I wouldn't be surprised.
What better way to keep the western world as paranoid as possible than to constantly spread fear and the news (which is more like entertainment these days anyway) push the proaganda by screming the "T" word everytime a car craches.
Sonic99 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 10381 times:
Like all private companies that seek to make money, U.S. media outlet (and particularly those in the U.S.) newsreaders (and writers) tend to use the term "terrorism" as a certain way to attract attention to their network.
In short - and this part really bugs me, but it's true - sensationalism sells ... period. News coverage lacks real news but is filled with useless potentiality of disaster and catastrophic events, either made up (as in the above claim of "possible terrorist threat") or tailored to sell the network to the public. Instead of showing real news about real events of the world most networks just satisfy themselves by producing "special reports" on "what you didn't know" like one of a million different ways someone can get hurt...
Pfff.... It's all rather pathetic. Those who really suffer are the regular folk that are getting too wound up by constant reminders of "potential threats".
MD80Nut From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1036 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10136 times:
The reality is that the great majority of private and commercial aircraft that are lost are lost for reasons other than terrorism. Still, those relatively few caused by terrorism have been rather spectacular events, 9/11 being the most spectacular and tragic. A terrorist act injects all kind complicating factors beyond aviation. Outrage at the perpetrators, political considerations, the stories of why they did it, how they did it, the response to terrorism, etc., etc. It's a lot bigger story, a much more significant event all around than a crash for aviation related reasons like weather, technical failure and/or human error.
Given all that, it's not surprising at all they're so quick to mention terrorism, even if it's just to dismiss it in that case.
Spacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3964 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10009 times:
The reality is that the great majority of private and commercial aircraft that are lost are lost for reasons other than terrorism.
The reality is also that many of the airliner crashes that have occured have also been due to terrorism. In terms of accident causes, it is probably the single most frequent. Most other single causes of accidents have been eradicated through redundant safety mechanisms these days, so terrorism is naturally one of the first things you would look at to rule out. This is how investigations work - first you determine what *didn't* happen, then you work backwards. (Otherwise you are just following a whole bunch of false leads.) Singular causes of crashes are the easiest to rule in or out so terrorism is always among the first things mentioned.
I wouldn't say terrorism is anymore "in" with the news media these days than it ever has been. 9/11 was certainly not the first time terrorists have brought down a plane - terrorists and bombers have been blowing up planes (including over the United States) since at least the 1960's. Don't forget that just prior to 9/11, a plot was busted up that would have brought down ten airliners simultaneously around the world, just after 9/11 we had Richard Reid, and shortly after that we had two terrorist bombs simultaneously bring down a Tu-134 and a Tu-154 in Russia.
That's the unfortunate reality of the situation. If you don't want the media to focus on it, go out and convince all the terrorists in the world to knock it off and get some other hobby. I personally think it's a pretty good idea to tell the world that it *isn't* terrorism as soon as that's known, because otherwise you'll have continuous and endless speculation about whether it was or it wasn't.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 36
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9686 times:
Quoting Spacecadet (Reply 17): 9/11 was certainly not the first time terrorists have brought down a plane - terrorists and bombers have been blowing up planes (including over the United States) since at least the 1960's.
No, but it was the first time where a civilian airliner was intentionally crashed into a skyscraper resulting in mass ground casulties.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
Ha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3730 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9663 times:
Quoting Spacecadet (Reply 17): I wouldn't say terrorism is anymore "in" with the news media these days than it ever has been.
I agree. The media used to always use the 'b' word (bomb) to indicate terrorism whenever an airliner crashed. After Sept. 11, it changed simply to 'terrorism' because bombs are not the only thing terrorists can use to bring down an airliner.
YOWza From South Africa, joined Jul 2005, 5033 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9629 times:
The American media (both left and right) love to hype up stories. Just as sex sells, fear sells. So for as long as people are afraid and as long as people keep paying attention to that ridiculous colour coded threat level monitor the producers at CNN, FOX and every other network are going to continue to use their favourite sentence "at this time terrorist involvement has not been ruled out."
BBC and the CBC are a little better but not by much.
Wingnut135 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 134 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 9444 times:
Terror is one way of group A keeping group B in control. The media, group A, does it to keep the public, group B, tuned in. If someone comes on the news stating a plane crashed in a country half way around the world, and that's it, most people would just shrug it off and change the channel. But if they throw the "T"-word in there, people will stay tuned to see what expert the network has called up and how much they can speculate from just looking at the picture on the screen. In most cases it's someone who hasn't been in the relevant field in some time, and all they do is toss out speculation bull sh*t until they forget what they were initially talking about. When AF358 crashed two of the big 3 news outlets had an expert on within minutes, and all either of them knew was that it was an airplane, and it was in a ditch off the runway in Toronto. Both of them kept spewing out bs, followed by more bs. "T"-word this, "T"-word that.
The media needs to be held accountable , but then there's the First Amendment to get around. All we can do is switch off.
A good friend will get you out of jail. A real friend will be there with you saying, "Damn that was fun!"
Philb From Ireland, joined May 1999, 2915 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 9412 times:
Quoting Spacecadet (Reply 17): The reality is also that many of the airliner crashes that have occured have also been due to terrorism. In terms of accident causes, it is probably the single most frequent.
Are you Spacecadet or totally spaced out?
Do yourself (and us all) a favour.
First find a dictionary and look up the meaning of "many". Then look up the meaning of "frequent".