←back to thread

279 points Michelangelo11 | 7 comments | | HN request time: 0.418s | source | bottom
Show context
dfox ◴[] No.45040695[source]
The article is somewhat sensationalistic. If you read the actual report you will find out that:

The pilot was not part of the conference call!

What froze was not hydraulic fluid for actuators (in some hydraulic line), but hydraulic fluid in the shock absorbers.

The last paragraph of the article and seems to be missing a few words and reads as the investigators blaming the people directly involved, which is essentially a complete opposite of what conclusions of the report say.

replies(13): >>45041203 #>>45041205 #>>45041260 #>>45041299 #>>45041304 #>>45041313 #>>45041359 #>>45041599 #>>45041942 #>>45041944 #>>45042051 #>>45042571 #>>45044912 #
andy_xor_andrew ◴[] No.45041299[source]
I read the article (twice) and I still have the impression the pilot was in fact the one in the conference call

Opening line:

> A US Air Force F-35 pilot spent 50 minutes on an airborne conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers trying to solve a problem with his fighter jet before he ejected

Am I illiterate or misreading it?

> After going through system checklists in an attempt to remedy the problem, the pilot got on a conference call with engineers from the plane’s manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, *as the plane flew near the air base. *

Is this actually some insane weasel-wording by CNN? "We never said the pilot (he is in fact a pilot) was the one flying the jet, we just said 'as the plane flew', not 'as he flew the plane', using passive voice, so we're not wrong - but it was another pilot flying the plane"

replies(3): >>45041365 #>>45041446 #>>45041702 #
the__alchemist ◴[] No.45041365[source]
Don't read the article; read the report.
replies(2): >>45041410 #>>45041421 #
1. andy_xor_andrew ◴[] No.45041421[source]
Sure, of course I will trust the report as the source of truth.

But I'm interested in the reporting. There are, you know, journalistic standards, which are considered kinda "journalism 101"! For instance, getting the basic facts of a story correct - especially the facts stated in the headline.

So I'm curious, did the reporter do their due diligence, and write the article in a way that is factually correct, but highly misleading? Or did they simply not follow basic reporting protocol?

replies(6): >>45041509 #>>45041948 #>>45042094 #>>45042400 #>>45042616 #>>45043499 #
2. the__alchemist ◴[] No.45041509[source]
The article is standard news stuff. It is sloppy and misleading. The report is what you want.
3. hluska ◴[] No.45041948[source]
I’m curious why you’re getting this worked up when the report is clear that the pilot was part of the information flow in that conference call. This is a really minor case of a headline using less precise language.
4. mulmen ◴[] No.45042094[source]
> There are, you know, journalistic standards

Are there? What are they?

5. throwawayoldie ◴[] No.45042400[source]
> There are, you know, journalistic standards, which are considered kinda "journalism 101"!

Pretty sure you meant to use the past tense here: "There _were_ journalistic standards..."

6. jasonlotito ◴[] No.45042616[source]
From the Report:

> The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF). The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action.

Seems accurate to what CNN was reporting. It's simplified a bit, but it's not misleading to me.

I mean, I guess if you want to nit pick and suggest "No the pilot wasn't literally on a phone and there was an intermediary in between" or some such, but the report makes it seem like CNN is accurate.

https://www.pacaf.af.mil/Portals/6/documents/3_AIB%20Report....

7. hnburnsy ◴[] No.45043499[source]
>But I'm interested in the reporting. There are, you know, journalistic standards, which are considered kinda "journalism 101"! For instance, getting the basic facts of a story correct - especially the facts stated in the headline.

Every single story is like this, every one, and f-them for not linking to the source documents.