Now that's a ground loop!

Wow. P&P couldn’t even bother to add their own text instead of the absolutely ****ty writing in that article.

No wonder their click-bait emails get processed by the auto-delete rule before they hit my inbox.

Horrible.
 
Holy crap that was poorly written

"After the plane goes onto its belly, watch it slide."

"At that point, the pilot probably had no more aerodynamic or braking control of the plane, but luckily, it stayed upright."


You cannot simply string words together and make complete coherent sentences. This is like the first stories six year olds write "First I had breakfast, then I saw my dog, my dad went to work, but luckily, I have a cat"

Shameful.

This was either written by an inept moron, computer AI generated text, or someone's 3rd grader.
 
ATC: King Air, do you need help??

King Air: Heck no, we always land like this....
 
Pilawt said:
Put them all together and you have a 21st Century journalist.
Click to expand...
Funny that forty years ago we complained about my hometown newspaper, the Akron Beacon Journal (aka "reeking urinal") for adolescent writing styles. Nothing has gotten better.
 
Local journalism has certainly suffered. Gone are the days of large newspapers with large circulation and experienced staff. I think our local paper is down to about three employees, none of which are more than 5 years out of college. Many articles seem to be written using Google and old articles for sources, with no leg work done to get the real story. I think its a product of the current education system, where you can pass writing classes without ever getting up from a computer. Add on the texting, emoji, internet babble that is now becoming acceptable "forms" of communication, and the quality of writing has become non existent.
 
The goal of journalism also seems to shift away from "let's get our readers facts and meaningful current events" to "how can we drive the most traffic to our site and generate the most daily users?" - what's more sad really is that the two are not commensurate with each other

"Plane descends after a loss of cabin pressure, all survive, no injuries reported"
vs
"Plane plummets 20,000 ft as terrified passengers nearly suffocate"
--I think I did the math once one of these "plane plummets" stories and the descent rate worked out to something like 2,500 ft/min.. as I understand it that's a very typical descent rate for a commercial jet
 
Tantalum said:
The goal of journalism also seems to shift away from "let's get our readers facts and meaningful current events" to "how can we drive the most traffic to our site and generate the most daily users?" - what's more sad really is that the two are not commensurate with each other

"Plane descends after a loss of cabin pressure, all survive, no injuries reported"
vs
"Plane plummets 20,000 ft as terrified passengers nearly suffocate"
--I think I did the math once one of these "plane plummets" stories and the descent rate worked out to something like 2,500 ft/min.. as I understand it that's a very typical descent rate for a commercial jet
Click to expand...

I think a lot of that is because of the shift to online media. A print paper didn't need a lot of flashy headlines to get sales, majority of their circulation was subscription based. But now they are completing for clicks online, so they have to make it more interesting than the next link.
 
midwestpa24 said:
I think a lot of that is because of the shift to online media. A print paper didn't need a lot of flashy headlines to get sales, majority of their circulation was subscription based. But now they are completing for clicks online, so they have to make it more interesting than the next link.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail no the head there. And its probably troubling for some to learn this is the reality of news reporting these days. But I kind of liken this condition and our discovery when we were young that the claims of advertisers could be deceiving.

We still have advertising and it can still be deceiving, but as we grow, we end up with a pretty good sense of what ad claims are realistic and likely to be accurate and which are likely to be BS. We as a society will learn that same skill in regards to news reporting.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
We still have advertising and it can still be deceiving, but as we grow, we end up with a pretty good sense of what ad claims are realistic and likely to be accurate and which are likely to be BS. We as a society will learn that same skill in regards to news reporting.
Click to expand...

Advertising always makes me wonder. I really can't think of a time where an ad caused me to change behavior, purchase a particular item, etc. Online advertising I literally scroll past. Political ads are meaningless, my politics are pretty well decided in advance. Vehicles, etc., I only purchase things when I need them, and I know what I want when I want it. Given how big the marketing industry is and the amount of money in it, you have to wonder does it really drive that much business?

I remember in college, in a little class called Quantitative Analysis, we had to do a performance study on a recent ad campaign by Pepsi, where they paid a certain pop star of the time something like $15 million for advertising endorsements. Then we had to look at their sales before, during, and after the campaign. While sales did vary, based on the mathematics of QA, we found the increase in sales was statistically insignificant. Even though they appeared on paper to have made up their investment, you couldn't not necessarily link it to the advertising campaign. It was likely from looking at past data they would have seen a similar increase in sales.
 
I think it was the third book of the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy trilogy had a star liner full of marketing people and telephone handset cleaners on it. They said they got the ride because they were a bunch of useless morons, or words to that effect. And things haven't improved since.

So, what did you think of the landing? I think the damage should buff right out,. :)
 
Crashnburn said:
So, what did you think of the landing? I think the damage should buff right out,. :)
Click to expand...

I'm going to guess totalled. One it's a government aircraft. Two it looks to be a B200T with tip tanks (was there ever an aftermarket upgrade available?). Those were built a long time ago, probably has a decent number of hours on the airframe. You've got damage to all three gear, both engines and props, and substantial sheet metal work on a 30-40 year old King Air.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Advertising always makes me wonder. I really can't think of a time where an ad caused me to change behavior, purchase a particular item, etc. Online advertising I literally scroll past. Political ads are meaningless, my politics are pretty well decided in advance.
Click to expand...
I have most definitely made product purchases that were 100% due to online ads. And in some (though not all) cases, I have valued those product purchases and can say 100% I would not have bought the products had I not seen the ads. I'm pretty sure my wife would say the same. So political stuff aside I strongly suspect you're the outlier here and I'm closer to the norm.

I remember in college, in a little class called Quantitative Analysis, we had to do a performance study on a recent ad campaign by Pepsi, where they paid a certain pop star of the time something like $15 million for advertising endorsements. Then we had to look at their sales before, during, and after the campaign. While sales did vary, based on the mathematics of QA, we found the increase in sales was statistically insignificant. Even though they appeared on paper to have made up their investment, you couldn't not necessarily link it to the advertising campaign. It was likely from looking at past data they would have seen a similar increase in sales.
Click to expand...
I think you took a pretty **** poor class and should probably ask for a refund. Advertising is a product that is subject to the principals of supply and demand just like any other free enterprise product. If it doesn't do what the customers want it to do, the customers cease to be customers.

You looked at exactly one very high profile ad campaign and you're drawing conclusions for an entire industry based on that. Simple 3rd grade logic would dictate that if your conclusions were accurate and valid, the industry as we know it would cease to exist. And yet, the industry continues to exist.

Why do you think that is? Do you think its because your class got it exactly right and the rest of the world is just that absolutely stupid? Or do you think it could be because your class got it wrong and the well established principals of supply and demand might have just a little something to do with it?
 
midwestpa24 said:
Advertising always makes me wonder. I really can't think of a time where an ad caused me to change behavior, purchase a particular item, etc.
Click to expand...

Although I have a DVR and will not watch 'live' channels. (Even if something is on right now that I want to warch, I will record it and watch it later so I can skip the advertisements.) On the rare occasion I do see an advertisement, it is a lot more likely to dissuade me from making a purchase than visa versa.
 
Tantalum said:
Holy crap that was poorly written

...This was either written by an inept moron, computer AI generated text, or someone's 3rd grader.
Click to expand...


The whole text of the article reads like the local sports reporter:
"On the subject of whether the plane will fly again or not, we’re voting that it will. One experienced King Air mechanic said he had worked on planes with similar damage, and while repairing them wasn’t quick or cheap, the damage could be fixed. The only question is, would it be cheaper to buy another King Air?"

Could be slightly changed for Ron Burgundy on Anchorman:
On the subject of whether the team will win again or not, we’re voting that they will. One experienced veteran player said he had worked on teams with similar shortcomings, and while repairing them wasn’t quick or cheap, the situation could be fixed. The only question is, would it be cheaper to buy another franchise?

Back to you Tom... Thanks Jim, that's quite a mess, next Tandy Tucker reports from the local zoo's adapt a Panda program.
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE="...

Back to you Tom... Thanks Jim, that's quite a mess, next Tandy Tucker reports from the local zoo's adapt a Panda program.[/QUOTE]
And what are they trying to adapt a Panda to? :)
 
Reminds me of the scene from "The Shipping News"

Billy: It's finding the center of your story, the beating heart of it, that's what makes a reporter. You have to start by making up some headlines. You know: short, punchy, dramatic headlines. Now, have a look, what do you see?
[Points at dark clouds at the horizon]
Billy: Tell me the headline.
Quoyle: Horizon Fills With Dark Clouds?
Billy: Imminent Storm Threatens Village.
Quoyle: But what if no storm comes?
Billy: Village Spared From Deadly Storm.
 
NordicDave said:
The whole text of the article reads like the local sports reporter:
"On the subject of whether the plane will fly again or not, we’re voting that it will. One experienced King Air mechanic said he had worked on planes with similar damage, and while repairing them wasn’t quick or cheap, the damage could be fixed. The only question is, would it be cheaper to buy another King Air?"

Could be slightly changed for Ron Burgundy on Anchorman:
On the subject of whether the team will win again or not, we’re voting that they will. One experienced veteran player said he had worked on teams with similar shortcomings, and while repairing them wasn’t quick or cheap, the situation could be fixed. The only question is, would it be cheaper to buy another franchise?

Back to you Tom... Thanks Jim, that's quite a mess, next Tandy Tucker reports from the local zoo's adapt a Panda program.
Click to expand...
Time for a rewatch, it's been a few years since I've seen it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top