[meteorite-list] Breaking news-satellite hit/ reporter's view

[Bob King]

Hi Bob and all,
I work in the "media" at a newspaper here in Duluth as a photographer
and understand your concerns. It's true that reporters will call or
visit Billy Bob or whoever makes an uninformed claim but the good ones
will always try to find another source to confirm or verify an event
like a meteor(ite) fall. If they don't, their editors will get on
their case.
 We might call the local planetarium for example or ask someone at one
of the universities to get some background information and an
assessment. I do think it's a reporter's job to ask lots of questions
beyond what's written in press releases. I overhear reporters all the
time digging for more information from their subjects and asking the
hard questions. Sometimes people won't give the real answers or
they'll give them but only off the record. Of course the newspaper
(and Web) is a beast that must be fed with content every day. Not
every story can be reported in the depth it needs to be. Rest assured
however, that at least in medium to large newspapers, the reporters
are generally a skeptical bunch. The best ones have built up reliable
sources and are not as likely to be bamboozled. The younger ones don't
have this advantage to start and are naturally more naive but they
learn.
At the news meetings, I'm often the skeptic and ask to make sure we
get at least a second point of view especially when we do a story on
say, a psychic or some amazing claim.
The most annoying thing working for a newspaper are the many people
who are convinced we have hidden agendas when we write or photograph.
Most of us are working stiffs just like the rest of the world.
TV journalism is very different from newspapers. The staffs are very
small compared to newspapers and the depth of reporting is lacking.
When mistakes are made on air, they're rarely corrected.
Bob


On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:22 PM, Bob Loeffler <bobl at peaktopeak.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  My opinion of the news media is that they SHOULD report the news the way it
>  was given to them.  It's not their job to analyze or read between the lines.
>  If a journalist wants to write a story on it, then yes, they should research
>  it, analyze it and give us all the facts of both sides of the issue.  But
>  not the news media.  I think everyone gets the "news media" confused with
>  "entertainment media".  In my brain, they are two completely separate groups
>  and have different functions.
>
>  And yes, I agree that journalism is getting worse and worse, but I think
>  it's because when they try to do the research, they aren't asking the right
>  people.  When a correspondent goes out into the field to get reports of a
>  meteorite fireball (for example), they are asking the average Joe who knows
>  nothing about the event.  "I was just sitting there on the porch and I saw
>  this bright light.  It was pretty and it looked like it hit my neighbor's
>  house down the way."  They tend to go for the "feel good" stories now
>  instead of the facts.  Instead, maybe they should talk to 3 or 4 reputable
>  scientists in the area instead of Billy Bob and his dog "Woofer".
>
>  Getting off the soapbox now.  :-)  If there is a Billy Bob who has a dog
>  named Woofer and he is reading this, I wasn't referring to you.
>
>  Now back to the topic:  Nothing new today about the shattered satellite on
>  MSNBC.  Did they get bored with it already?  :-)  Have there been any
>  reports of re-entering debris?
>
>  Regards,
>
>  Bob
>
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
>  [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Francis
>  Graham
>  Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 4:38 PM
>  To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>  Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Breaking news-- satellite hit
>
>  Bob wrote:
>  > The hydrazine aspect was a total smokescreen.
>  > Complete B.S., which
>  > news stations should have been embarrassed to report
>  > as the "main
>  > reason".  The government/military was not in the
>  > least bit concerned
>  > about the hydrazine injuring or killing someone on
>  > the ground because
>  > it was not even a 6-sigma possibility.  You should
>  > all be offended
>  > that the U.S. government thinks you are that stupid.
>  >  Why couldn't
>  > they have just been honest:  WE DON'T WANT ANY
>  > REMNANTS OF HIGHLY
>  > CLASSIFIED TECHNOLOGY ANALYZED BY UNFRIENDLY
>  > COUNTRIES.  AND BESIDES,
>  > WE'RE SALIVATING AT THE OPPORTUNITY TO TEST AN ABM
>  > AGAINST A
>  > DIFFICULT TARGET.  It's really that simple.  The
>  > timing of the
>  > intercept more or less proves it.  --Rob
>
>   Isn't that what I said on an earlier post?!?
>   The news media seems willing to hire people who talk
>  through their nose and read Pentagon press releases
>  without any thought or analysis whatsoever. I'll bet
>  people at the Pentagon are even surprised. Journalism
>  has been going deeper into the abyss as the years go
>  by, it seems. Sigh.
>
>  Francis Graham
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ____________________________________________________________________________
>  ________
>  Be a better friend, newshound, and
>  know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
>  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>  ______________________________________________
>  http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>  Meteorite-list mailing list
>  Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>  http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>  ______________________________________________
>  http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>  Meteorite-list mailing list
>  Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>  http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>