>>>>>>Why do you criticize the press for doing the same thing?
>>>Because they are highly paid professionals who should get their facts right, most of us on a.net are not professionals, we're amateurs.
While this is a reasonable statement, it doesn't take one critical item into consideration.....
Back in during the summer of 1996, I was driving crosstown one evening, and news hit the radio that TWA 800 had gone down off Long Island. After about :30 seconds, I clicked the radio off. When I got to my destination (in-laws home) about 20 minutes later, everyone was around the teevee watching CNN. I glanced at it on the way in, but didn't pay much attention to it. When my mother-in-law asked me why I wasn't watching, I explained to her the :30 seconds of radio news I'd listen to on the way over. Specifically, I told her that the only absolute things that were known for sure at this point were:
1/ A 747 is down off Long Island
2/ It was TWA 800
3/ Wreckage is burning on the water.
Other than the :30 seconds it took to hear that on the radio on the way over, NOBODY had had any further info, least of all, authoritative info, to offer. That kind of info evolves over several days post-accident. Yet, thousands of folks were glued to the teevee, watching the wreckage burn, and listening to the teevee folks to yak/speculate in order to fill-up all the airtime. Of course, folks take that yak/speculation all that much more seriously, since "they saw it reported on the TV news..." etc.
I'm fully supportive of a free press, and their duty to inform, but sometimes the events that they're covering don't lend themselves to fitting in with the media's timelines and deadlines. Not wanting to listen to the babble, I exercise my right to click the "off" switch.
Just my 2 cents....
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.