Cross post from incidents - Media rant...

[ERICCONNELLY 0]

I think the by line has a typo.

Should read JACK MORON, not MORAN.

http://www.registerguard.com/news/2003/01/06/1b.cr.parachutistdeath.0106.html

I wish these guys would just say "We have no information" instead of trying to make stuff up.

Rant over.

[Gawain 0]

I agree, though the last two paragraphs of the article convey a realistic message:

Quote

"Of course it's sad to hear about, but it's not as if people aren't aware of the risk when they decide to do something like that," said Dubick (mayor), who likened the activity to auto racing.

"We went years without something like this happening, and now we've had two (accidents) in a short period of time. It's very unfortunate."

As for the rest of the article, I agree. I would like them to treat it more like they treat other incidents (like a plane crash) and all they report is what they know. I guess some things are two much to wish for...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 2,991]

>As for the rest of the article, I agree. I would like them to treat it
> more like they treat other incidents (like a plane crash) and all they
> report is what they know. I guess some things are two much to wish
> for...

If you were a pilot, you'd think they were as bad reporting aviation accidents as they were reporting skydiving accidents. Read the news accounts of the Kennedy crash for some examples of truly speculative reporting.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

If you were a pilot, you'd think they were as bad reporting aviation accidents....

You're right, I don't have the benefit of that experience. Either that, or I just have selective hearing.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[wmw999 2,445]

Y'know, it's interesting -- I thought it was an OK article for an early article. It answered key questions that people are interested in. It tried pretty hard to make it clear where there isn't that much knowledge.

His chute failed to open in time (note it didnt' say failed to open), and it clearly ascribes to the jumper the responsibility for opening it, but leaves whether he tried to open.

It identified him as not being a student, without guessing further about experience. Reported on what a witness said about weather conditions. And it interviewed a city father about whether this was going to lead to "regulation" of skydiving (trust me, people are interested in that). The city father quoted makes it clear that an incident is not an automatic cause for regulation.

It's all well and good to say that there shouldn't be any story until all facts are in, but that's unrealistic. If a DZ has a good working relationship with the press, then the press will trust them to fill in the details later, and make it clear this is preliminary. If they know they're not going to get any cooperation, then they'll feel much more free to extrapolate on their own.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[base698 14]

I don't get why its any of the publics concern. We are the only ones that need to be informed of an accident so that we may learn from mistakes. I think if they want to do an article on a skydiving accident it should have all the information within to understand it. If that is impossible I don't think it should be reported.

That and I'd really like to ban for profit news agencies...

[PhillyKev 0]

Hell, if I was a whuffo that lived near there and found out some guy went in behind my back yard where my children play, it would certainly be a concern to me.

That was IMO decent, neutral, news reporting without any sensationalism or speculation. That's what news should be.

[billvon 2,991]

>I don't get why its any of the publics concern. We are the only ones
> that need to be informed of an accident so that we may learn from
> mistakes.

Would you be in favor of a law that prohibited reporting of aviation accidents to anyone other than pilots?

"What's that column of smoke over there?"

"Sorry, you're not a pilot, you have no need to know."

>That and I'd really like to ban for profit news agencies...

Perhaps have a state-run news agency, that only reported the government-approved news? Personally I'm glad we have private news organizations. Wider variety of views that way.

[base698 14]

Quote

Would you be in favor of a law that prohibited reporting of aviation accidents to anyone other than pilots?

"What's that column of smoke over there?"

"Sorry, you're not a pilot, you have no need to know."

Thats not what I'm saying at all. Of course the public can have free discourse of information. The only thing that gets selected to be on the news is if its worthy of ratings. If the public wants to know about aviation accidents they should consult the ntsb or maybe an indenpendent organization devoted to that.

Quote

Perhaps have a state-run news agency, that only reported the government-approved news? Personally I'm glad we have private news organizations. Wider variety of views that way.

So in your view you have a false dichotomy of our current media system versus a state run system. There are of course other options. Not for profit private organizations that are not based on ratings could be a start. As is the news agencies only report what they get from their sources. There is less plurality of sources here than elsewhere where the news is state run. All our news does is report what the people in power say anyway. There is rarely any questioning of the reasons, logical, and factual basis for what their sources say and that shoulc be the basis for good journalism.

[Iflyme 0]

Quote

I don't get why its any of the publics concern.

There are people in this world who like to know what is going on in their communities, and there are companies that provide that information.

Quote

We are the only ones that need to be informed of an accident

Says who? You have absolutely no right to determine what information is made public, and what information is suppresed. A controlled media is undemocratic, and in fact dangerous. Who do you suggest decides what the public should be told? The government? The Church? You???

Quote

I think if they want to do an article on a skydiving accident it should have all the information within to understand it.

Are you an expert on every subject? The journalist is facing a deadline, and has to gather as much information about a subject they may no very little or nothing about, then try to make sense of it, and present it in a way the uninformed public will understand. The writer of this article probably has never had any involvement with the skydiving community. All our jargon and terminology is like a foreign language to an outsider. You, on the other had, have the good fortune of having a deep knowledge of the sport. Perhaps you don't find the information as specific as you would like, but Joe Lunchbucket now has some idea of what happened.

[AggieDave 6]

Wait, wait, wait, Bill Von, are you trying to say that reporters in America don't always report factual information and are biased? Noooooo.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Wait, wait, wait, Bill Von, are you trying to say that reporters in America don't always report factual information and are biased? Noooooo.

I'm still grooving on the Eloy vibe to even deal with this "serious" stuff. It just seems so petty Don't ya miss Eloy Dave? hey, I got some cool pics with you in them bro

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[AggieDave 6]

Yeah, I do miss that vibe. My Eloy buzz got killed today and my life got real serious real quick...we do have some cool pics, though. I like the one with you and me at the dinner, we're both tossing out the shocker for the camera.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[LouDiamond 1]

DUDE!! Don't let the seriousness kill your Eloy vibe. If I can still hang onto it so can you. It's ALL goody in the hooody my monkey

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[mdowling 0]

Eric, I respect your opinion but I have to disagree. I qualify my thoughts with the fact that I'm a full-time newspaper reporter for a major metropolitan newspaper. As a few people pointed out, reporters very often get stuck reporting on things they have very little independent knowledge of at first.

Reporters are often totally stuck repeating whatever information is provided through "official" sources. In this case, the police provided that info - and no offense to any cops out there, but they very often provide less than complete information for a variety of reasons. That being said, in my professional opinion, the story was pretty decent. Way better than others I've seen.

Here's the solution (and I've seen some DZs that already do this based on their rapid response) - have a media plan for when accidents occur. They will occur. We know it. Plan for it. If you reread the story, the reporter tried to reach out to a rep from the dz and got turned away. There should be someone designated (usually the owner) to talk to the papers and tv folks when they call. And the people who answer the phone at the dz should know how to reach them at any hour to give that response. That is the absolute only way to get accurate information and terminology in the paper. Good reporters will take guidance from experts like a dz owner on how to phrase things if it's offered. Even if you don't want to talk directly about the accident, the media rep can give that all important quote about how great a person the skydiver was who just died or got badly hurt doing what we love.

And if they report it poorly the next day, don't get offended. Give them a call and politely tell them how the story and terminology could have been more accurate. That might make the next accident story a better experience. Then invite the reporter to come cover the next charity event/demo/take a tandem/etc at the drop zone.

[Iflyme 0]

Quote

I qualify my thoughts with the fact that I'm a full-time newspaper reporter for a major metropolitan newspaper.

To be fair, I too should fess up and state that I am a television news producer ...

[ManBird 0]

Quote

Y'know, it's interesting -- I thought it was an OK article for an early article. It answered key questions that people are interested in.

But it gave the wrong answers. When I first read it, I thought he had a total mal. Then the true story came out, and that wasn't anywhere near the case. If nothing else, it's tough for family and friends (no, I didn't know him) to hear about losing someone in a frightening or tragic way, when the reality was that he most likely went very peacefully.

"¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯"

Click

[riddler 0]

You forgot to mention that reporters often "get stuck" coming up with a story that can compete with other "newsworthy" items, and are therefore hard-pressed to make it sound exciting as it could be. Ergo, let's make things up, shall we? But it's not entirely their fault. We are a society that lives our lives through the Hollywood vision - there needs to be a car chase or sex scene every five minutes to keep it interesting. And if reporters actually took the time to explore the facts and report them accurately, well that wouldn't exactly sell, would it?

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[billvon 2,991]

>Of course the public can have free discourse of information . . .

So when you said "We are the only ones that need to be informed of an accident so that we may learn from mistakes" what did you mean? That the media should voluntarily restrict their distribution to people who 'need to know?' Not sure of your point here.

>If the public wants to know about aviation accidents they should consult
>the ntsb or maybe an indenpendent organization devoted to that.

Like, say, an organization devoted to local news? Or are you saying that only news organizations that have some sort of standardized qualification be allowed to report on aviation news? If so, who decides that?

>So in your view you have a false dichotomy of our current media system versus
>a state run system.

A dichotomy is a division into two parts; a false dichotomy is something that appears to be divided into two parts but really isn't. Is that what you meant?

In any case, I do not advocate either one. I advocate letting YOU choose what you want to read. MSNBC pisses you off? Don't read it - wait for parachutist. Can't wait? Then you will get quick, rather than accurate, news. Your choice.

And if you choose to read the less-accurate source when you know it's less accurate, you have no one to blame but yourself.

>Not for profit private organizations that are not based on ratings
>could be a start.

Try NPR. It's a not for profit organization that does not accept advertising, and thus is not very ratings-based.

>There is less plurality of sources here than elsewhere where the news is
>state run.

Here you can get news everywhere from the Cato Institute to FOX to NPR to the Village Voice. Pick the tint you want.

>All our news does is report what the people in power say anyway.

You're reading the wrong sources. There is more to news than NBC.

[billvon 2,991]

>Here's the solution (and I've seen some DZs that already do this based on their
> rapid response) - have a media plan for when accidents occur.

This is a really good idea. Reporters are always looking for good information, and if they don't have the information, that's when errors pop up. We had a fatality back in NY and we didn't say a word about it to anyone, and as a result, reporters got all their info from the cops - and it was mostly wrong.

Generally, it's better if one person handles all media inquiries, and has a short statement prepared that lists only what was known to have happened i.e. name and age, # of jumps, atmospheric conditions at time of accident, time of accident, general type (i.e. good canopy but low turn.) This minimizes speculation and rumor, and increases the accuracy of the article. If it lists only factual info, it also won't come back to bite you later in a lawsuit.

[Deleted 0]

I feel that education is the key ignorance. So, let the reporters put there story in the paper. But make sure that the DZ owner talks to them, and gives them thecorrect info. the only problem with this is that the DZ owner best have there lawyer sitting right next to them. We all learn from others mistakes, we all have a right to know what goes on in our cummunity. But lets put the real facts out there. Being a DZ owner carries alot of weight. So the attitude that " I am not talking to no stinking reporter" Only makes things worse. I feel that the Owners should put together an accurate statement, and let the public do with it what they want.

[ERICCONNELLY 0]

Just to keep this alive.

Information was given. Just not recieved. I agree the best plan is to have a plan for responding to the media B4 the shit hits the fan.

All the DZ staff (and regular jumpers) should be included in this plan. We all want our sport to have a positive image but there are some that still prefer sensationalism to reality.

ETR

Quote

Jessica Fichtel M.S.
Account Manager Southwestern and Eastern Oregon
Qmed/Interactive Heart Management
541-914-4053

----- Original Message -----
From: JESSICA FICHTEL
To:
Cc: ;
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 12:37 PM
Subject: Paul E. Whelchel, Parachutist who died January 5th, 2002


> Mr. Moran,
> It has taken me several hours this morning to be able to formulate an
> appropriate response to your account of Mr. Whelchel's death on Sunday.
> Being someone who fondly knew Mr. Whelchel and was the first on the seen
and
> administered CPR until the Emergency Response Teams arrived, I am appalled
> at your literary account of his death. First and foremost, I think your
use
> of the word PLUNGE as a continuation lead was absolutely disgusting, rude,
> unthinkable and distasteful, not to mention that Mr. Whelchel's children
> will see that and it will deepen the pain they are already feeling. Mr.
> Moran, you should be ashamed of yourself and you should have tried to be
> more compassionate.
> In addition, Sgt. Kevin Woodworth is so grossly informed of the event
> that it is almost sickening. You would think that a member of the
Sheriff's
> department, let alone a senior staffer, would be able to provide the
> appropriate information given to him. I was there first hand when he was
> receiving this information and there seemed to have been a little
> ill-translation of what went in his ears, as opposed to what came out his
> mouth. Please be sure to account for the truth and verify facts when
> commenting on a sport that is completely unfamiliar to you. I understand
> that garbage in equals garbage out, so you aren't responsible for what you
> are given.
> The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Medical Examiner
(ME)
> along with the USPA's Safety and Training Advisor Liaison for Creswell,
will
> determine the exact nature of the accident and hopefully shed light on
what
> seems so jumbled and inconclusive, and hopefully be able to clear-up any
> misunderstandings. As of this morning, the ME's office stated that Mr.
> Whelchel had significant coronary artery disease (CAD) and that the
injuries
> he sustained from impact with the ground were very minimal and that they
> couldn't be directly responsible for his death. Mr. Whelchel's skydive
was
> uneventful up until the point after he broke away from the group in order
to
> open his parachute at a safe distance from other jumpers. It was at that
> point that something became noticeably wrong when he did not deploy at the
> appropriate altitude. His automatic activation device (also known as an
> AAD, which fires in the event of a no-pull as the jumper falls through a
> certain barometric pressure at a certain rate of speed) fired, deploying
his
> reserve parachute. The question of a gear malfunction is moot because we
> know his reserve was deployed by the AAD only after he passed through a
> certain altitude at a certain rate of speed having not pulled. From that
> point on the only person qualified to assess the exact nature of Mr.
> Whelchel's death is the ME. If the Register Guard chooses to do a
follow-up
> story, please consult the ME and also the USPA Safety and Training Liaison
> for Creswell and also the FAA. It is then, and only then, that you will
> have the true and right facts.
> Paul was an experienced jumper who had been a member of the United
> States Parachute Association (USPA) for at least nine years, ( but who had
> been jumper since the 1960's) who was a current C-License holder (the
> highest you can go is a D-License) and who was loved by all of his fellow
> jumpers and family, and who was affectionately known as Papa Chop. We are
> feeling confused, hurt, frustrated, without words, tearful and left
> wondering what happened and why. Paul was an exuberant and fun-loving man
> who was part of our family...a family of jumpers...a family of people who
> love the sport of skydiving and who loved Paul. We will miss him very
much.
>
> Jessica Fichtel M.S.
> Account Manager Southwestern and Eastern Oregon
> Cardiac Disease Management Programs
> Qmed/Interactive Heart Management
> 541-914-4053

[mdowling 0]

Good to see that someone followed up with the reporter and provided additional information that was not available on deadline for the first story (though a slightly less accusatory tone would have been better - reporters aren't malicious people and I've been on the receiving end of several letters like this after a tragedy). Hopefully, he's responsible enough to write an update in a subsequent edition of the paper to explain the jumper's medical condition as a possible cause of his no pull.

It seems Jessica's concerns spoke directly to my earlier point. If you leave the details and explanation to a non-jumping police officer (and they will give those out because of open public records laws), they will get the story muddled.

Even if a dz's media response plan is only to issue a simple statement saying --
"(The jumper) was a beloved part of our close-knit skydiving community and we are deeply saddened by his loss. We can only hope that a thorough investigation will give us answers as to the cause of the accident. Until then, our first priority must be to convey our deepest condolences to his family."
That at least puts a human and caring voice on our sport, which many people can't begin to understand.