Smoketown, the media blitz

grattonja

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
944
Location
Pennsylvania
Display Name

Display name:
saratoga driver
Smoketown was the center of a media vortex yesterday, as no one can really imagine. As we have, and will continue to, quarterback the actions of the others involved, I thought I would give all a bit of insight into what can be expected at your airport if something like this happens. My wife, who is also an attorney active in litigation and versed in dealing with the press, went out to make sure that they were not taking advantage of some of the folks at the airport who have no idea what all this stuff is about. So I have a bird's eye view of the events of yesterday.

Some things went well at S37 and some things not so well, and I figured this is the place to share for all.

First, it is impossible to really understand what national media scrutiny is like. I try homicide cases, and am used to a few reporters around. Janet told me that she recognized people from every major media outlet between Philly and Harrisburg, all with camera crews, all poking about trying to get a quote from everyone at S37. Anyone who knows Smoketown knows that it is a little, hometown airport where everyone knows everyone and it is close knit. It was a shock to all to be under such scrutiny. These people were literally there, shoving microphones under people's noses, demanding quotes. Literally. Janet had to shoo away CN8, who chose a bad person to bother, as she hates having stuff stuck in her face.

Things that went well:

By dumb luck, the FBO got rid of it's Nixon era carpet yesterday, and the office was effectively closed as the carpeting got replaced. So the media couldn't get into the office to pry about security issues and a bunch of the employees were not in or could easily be sent home. I am going to talk to the rental agency about security here in a day or two. I assume, as the press now knows where we are, they may come back to "test" security.

Mel Glick, the owner, did a decent job of dealing with the media. He had a prepared statement for the general press, and only gave one prearranged interview, to a local reporter, that came off well. He did a good and simple job of managing pr for the airport.

My wife managed to intervene in a couple of attempts to interview young CFIs and others who might not realize how truly evil the press can be when they want something.

As attorneys, we have both learned valuable things about the press. First, THEY ARE NOT YOUR FRIEND, don't talk to them. I tell this to my clients and I pass it along to all of you. It applies to anyone who is a target of the media. Second, they have their own agenda. No matter how well you speak, or what you say, they will work it to their own agenda. They clip words, focus on off hand comments, and otherwise manipulate their words to fit their agenda. Third, they get it wrong. You all have had a dose of that from a distance, but it is way worse when you are in the firestorm. Fourth, people get stupid in front of the cameras. No one from S37 did that, but some of the neighbors of the pilots did. If you saw the coverage from them, you saw the "dumb as dirt glazed look say anything" appearance of these people. Some people find a video camera and a mic irresistible, and will really get dumber. I seriously think they lose IQ points when video rolls. If I talk to the press as an attorney for a client, I have thought out ahead of time what I want to say. Sometimes, even then, it doesn't go as I thought it would.

Most folks from the S37 made themselves scarce. That was good. Less people equals less chances for the media to take advantage.

Things that went not so well:

We Monday morning quarterback. We are already doing that here. And we are all used to doing it in the comfort of our own little airport worlds. But now S37 has the press prowling, listening to and reporting these conversations. I can tell you, without naming names, that some folks at S37 were quoted (accurately or not god knows) as commenting on the experience, and recency, and knowledge of these guys. One, it hurts GA when the media nails us eating our own. Two, I can guarantee there will be hurt feelings after some of the quotes (or misquotes) get around, which, since it is national news, they already are. Things said about the flying club that own the plane will be reverberating around at S37 for some time to come.

The local DE gave a few quotes, and, through no fault of his own, has now been quoted as "the FAA said" in the local rag. Not good, especially when those quotes involve the recent experience of the pilot. Again, the press are NOT OUR FRIENDS. And they GET IT WRONG.

On the whole, if these folks come knocking, everyone should give a few minutes thought to how to deal with it. You want to keep your opinions to yourself, probably. Your airport manager or owner should have given some thought to dealing with the press. Perhaps a bit of training by AOPA would be a good thing? They always say we are the goodwill ambassadors for GA, and, when the wolves are howling at the door, they are right. We can control the spin that is put on an incident like this, to some extent, by what we say and how we behave.

I cannot emphasize enough, having watched this unfold for a day now, you cannot imagine the insanity that the press can bring down upon your little airport.

Jim G
 
grattonja said:
Smoketown was the center of a media vortex yesterday, as no one can really imagine.

As attorneys, we have both learned valuable things about the press. First, THEY ARE NOT YOUR FRIEND, don't talk to them.
Jim G

Jim:

Thanks for the update. I CAN imagine the media circus quite well and your advice that the press are not your friend is true. We have been involved in a number of incidents that involved a lot of press activity and your comments accurately descibe how these things play out. It is very easy to be in front of a mic and a rolling camera and suffer from the loss of intellegence, the reporters are professions, it's their job, and they can be quite good at getting "sensational" quotes from people who, in all honesty, were just trying to be helpful.

With any luck , they will move on to the next "big story" and Smoketown can return to normalcy.
 
EXCELLENT post! Very good advice. You're absolutly right. The lights and the camera go on and the brain goes out the side door. What's left isn't usually what you want to convey to the camera.

I sort of wish the AOPA would have sent a rep up to S37 to hang out and represent GA until the camera trucks were gone.
 
inav8r said:
EXCELLENT post! Very good advice. You're absolutly right. The lights and the camera go on and the brain goes out the side door. What's left isn't usually what you want to convey to the camera.

I sort of wish the AOPA would have sent a rep up to S37 to hang out and represent GA until the camera trucks were gone.

For those that missed it, AOPA sent Phil Boyer to CNN to be interviewed for the 8 PM show (I forgot the talking head's name, Paula something--looked like Jane Fonda in a blonde wig).
 
Remember that the media is out to gain an audience. The best way to do that is to sensationalize.

A local TV reporter here just resigned, saying he's tired of the emphasis on crime. Good for him.
 
Excellent post. I've taken the liberty of copying parts of it (without names of course) to give to our FBO here at my little airport.

I would have given you rep points for it but I need to spread some around first :)

Thanks.
 
Fantastic post Jim.

Maybe someone needs to arrange another runaway bride to deflect attention :D
 
My wife said the media were like a herd of cats. When the secret service arrived, they literally RAN in a pack to go try to find them. Much to the amusement of locals, who knew where they were parking, and that the media would be running back by in about 30 seconds. Which they did.

The secret service guys were taken through back hangar doors to get to and from their cars, circumventing some of the media. Much to their consternation. Overall, the media did not get the access that they certainly would have liked to have gotten.

They were still broadcasting "live" as late as 11 pm at the airport. Told my wife I wish I would have thought they would be there so late. I would have gone out to get night current and torture them just a little bit. Also, I would like to have dropped a bag of something nasty on the local reporter who was camped out on the student pilot's front doorstep, waiting for the poor guy to get home so they could hit him with a camera.

So far, the pilots have not been interviewed that I know of. As the FAA could no doubt use anything they say to the media, they are best to not talk to anyone.

One pilot was doing instrument work and they got some great shots of her red and white skyhawk taxiing around. She is less than pleased. One of the charter guys came in while they were rolling film, but hopefully he is the guy I talked to by cell phone and knew it was a circus.

I was really amazed at the neighbors of the two guys, and how incredibly entranced they seemed by the cameras, while saying stupid stuff. I have seen stupid in front of the cameras before, but that was by attorneys who have seen cameras. These poor folks just looked like deer in the headlights.

Hopefully, it has settled down today and we can all get on with having fun.

Pity the ADIZ won't be leaving us anytime soon.

Jim G
 
Think you can get Mike Kuhn a muzzle? Now he going on about the pilot having trouble with the fuel pump.
 
This is good advice.

I got nailed when I was a student, showing up for a lesson the morning after a local pilot hit the power lines under and outside the usual downwind leg, killing 4. I had heard the story on the radio that morning. The airport was pretty quiet.

The old timers in the FBO wouldn't talk to anybody, and, I think, wouldn't let the two news crews that were there come inside the building. The most exciting thing was sitting in plane while it got bounced as it was buffeted by the downwash as one of the news choppers landed nearby.

But dumb ol' me, with all of the know-it-all confidence only a student can have started talking one of them. I had thoughts that I'd show them the Kollsman window setting on the altimeter in my plane.

I started saying those power lines are 100 feet above the ground under where we fly to land on 27 and there is that cell tower you see when you turn base for 24... The other reporter grabbed her cameraman and asked, "Are you saying he was too low." I said, "He was too low."

The result was that dumb ol' me wearing my free EAA T-Shirt was on the Noon News saying, "He was too low." Well, Doh! Do ya think?

Never again. I was a lot smarter back when I was student, just like we all were when we were teenagers.
 
Last edited:
MSmith said:
Think you can get Mike Kuhn a muzzle? Now he going on about the pilot having trouble with the fuel pump.


I didn't name any names.

They changed the fuel pumps about 2 years ago, give or take a bit. I guess this pilot hadn't fueled a plane at S37 since. Nothing fatal to flying. I have had problems figuring out (even finding) the pumps at as diverse places as Glenwood Springs Co and Portland Int. But the press grabs the part of the quote they like and runs like h..l with it.

As I said above, and I can't say this enough.

1. DON'T TALK TO THE PRESS.

2. THE PRESS IS NOT YOUR FRIEND.


Jim G
 
mikea said:
This is good advice.

I got nailed when I was a student, showing up for a lesson the morinng after a local pilot hit the power lines under the downwind, killing 4. I had heard the story on the radio that morning. The airport was pretty quiet.

The old timers in the FBO wouldn't talk to anybody, and, I think, wouldn't let the two news crews that were there come inside the building. The most exciting thing was sitting in plane while it got bounced as it was buffeted by the downwash as one of the news choppers landed nearby.

But dumb ol' me, with all of the know-it-all confidence only a student can have started talking one of them. I had thoughts that I'd show them the Kolman window setting on the altimeter in my plane.

I started saying those power lines are 100 feet above the ground under where we fly to land on 27 and there is that cell tower you see when you turn base for 24... The other reporter grabbed her cameraman and asked, "Are you saying he was too low." I said, "He was too low."

The result was that dumb ol' me wearing my free EAA T-Shirt was on the Noon News saying, "He was too low." Well, Doh! Do ya think?

Never again. I was a lot smarter back when I was student, just like we all were when we were teenagers.

If I knew half as much now as I knew when I was a student pilot... :D

Jim G
 
No, you didn't name any names. I did - his name showed up in an AP article.
 
MSmith said:
No, you didn't name any names. I did - his name showed up in an AP article.


As an attorney, I always tell my criminal defendant clients that I don't care if I never see my name in the paper. As a public defender, I really DON'T either, as I don't even seem to need to generate business. Besides, they usually spell my name wrong anyway :yes: .

It is a pity that a camera will engender in some the need to get their name in the news. Certainly, I am not saying that Mike did that. I bet he is wishing he had just climbed in the chopper, right about now, without talking to anyone.

When I said above that we need to keep our "Monday morning quarterbacking" to ourselves when the press is around... well... this is why.

I do hope this "too stupid to work the pumps" story line dies out soon.

Again, I name no names at S37. I don't want any hard feelings with anyone. Particularly when I am no more immune to stupidity than the next pilot.

Jim G
 
OK

As the guy who has worked in the media for almost 20 years I guess I should point out a few points we may agree and disagree.

1. There are good media and there are bad media. TV Guys, ALL TV GUYS...Bad Media. So I agree with you on those points.

2. Newspaper people. Well, thats a bit more complicated. The National boys, The New York Time, Tribune, Post etc. are not all bad, and when you say "OFF THE RECORD" they will generally respect that. But even the big boys can be Jerks. That leaves two groups, wire reporter (AP) and Local reporters. These two groups can be a really good people. If your in any kind of trouble of course don't even think about talking to them, get a lawyer. But, if you can provide insight or expertise, then give them a chance. You don't have to give your name, go off record if need be. But make certain you say that clearly. THIS IS OFF THE RECORD DON'T US MY NAME. Hiding in a hole and refusing comment can be every-bit as destructive as talking too much.

Same holds true with still photographers. The national guys are almost all way too aggressive. Work with the local shooters and tell the national guys to take a walk, NEVER try to take someone's camera. Its called steeling and they will file suit. But, once you let a photographer have access assume everything is fair game, unless you have a clear understanding before hand, even then assume everything fair game. I always respected those arrangement but other didn't.

I think S37 handle things correctly. They had a spokesman who read prepared statesmen's. The statements where factual, accurate and timely. They talked to local reporters they could trust. Those reports then get fed to the wire services so its not like the word doesn't get out.

Remember, mewspaper and wire reporters..Can Be good,....TV Reporters, vain shallow animals.

Dan Corjulo
The Hartford Courant
 
I lived with a newspaper reporter girlfriend for eight months or so. She already had an agenda BEFORE she interviewed whoever on a story. It amazed me that she took herself seriously as a journalist. The whole paper was pretty much like that.

Say what you want, Dan. Personally, I lump the media into one big pool and avoid all of them. I seldom watch the news, never read our local liberal rag (we had a police officer killed two days ago. Top story above the fold? "Zoo has health care problems". The killing was below the fold and considerably smaller. Sheesh), and distrust the media as much as politicians. Everyone has an agenda.
 
corjulo said:
As the guy who has worked in the media for almost 20 years I guess I should point out a few points we may agree and disagree.
As the guy who has worked in the media for more than 20 years, I would tend to agree with you.

During the JFK and Payne Stewart aftermaths, I had the privilege/misfortune of being one of the broadcast news talking heads. It started in the hours after JFK went down when MSNBC was broadcasting utter bull****. I called the news desk in New York sometime around 10 pm, pointing out the most egregious of errors. I got a snotty "what makes you the expert?" When I offered that I was editor in chief of Aviation Safety magazine, he put me on with a producer. That led to the trips to the studio and the floodgates opened. For the next two weeks, I would get calls from a variety of broadcast media. I would brief the producers on the significance of findings, tell them what I could surmise and what I would not conjecture about. Then when they'd patch me in with the anchor on the air I'd get some dumb-*** question that not only proved the time spent with the producer was wasted, but also that the broadcast news anchors are largely too stupid to tie their own shoes. Finally I drew the line when NBC wanted to send a satellite truck to my house for Dateline or something during my kid's birthday party. I still get the occasional call from a producer, most recently after the Teterboro runway overrun, but no way am I going to throw myself into that quagmire again. It was interesting after a career on one side of the media to be thrown to the other side. I discovered that you don't have to be good or smart to have a high-profile media job, you simply have to be aggressive and speak well under pressure.

I found the PBS radio people to be somewhat more thoughtful. The wire service guys were OK but too overworked to go much past superficial. The WSJ guy was good, but he was also a pilot.
 
corjulo said:
OK

As the guy who has worked in the media for almost 20 years I guess I should point out a few points we may agree and disagree.

1. There are good media and there are bad media. TV Guys, ALL TV GUYS...Bad Media. So I agree with you on those points.

2. Newspaper people. Well, thats a bit more complicated. The National boys, The New York Time, Tribune, Post etc. are not all bad, and when you say "OFF THE RECORD" they will generally respect that. But even the big boys can be Jerks. That leaves two groups, wire reporter (AP) and Local reporters. These two groups can be a really good people. If your in any kind of trouble of course don't even think about talking to them, get a lawyer. But, if you can provide insight or expertise, then give them a chance. You don't have to give your name, go off record if need be. But make certain you say that clearly. THIS IS OFF THE RECORD DON'T US MY NAME. Hiding in a hole and refusing comment can be every-bit as destructive as talking too much.

Same holds true with still photographers. The national guys are almost all way too aggressive. Work with the local shooters and tell the national guys to take a walk, NEVER try to take someone's camera. Its called steeling and they will file suit. But, once you let a photographer have access assume everything is fair game, unless you have a clear understanding before hand, even then assume everything fair game. I always respected those arrangement but other didn't.

I think S37 handle things correctly. They had a spokesman who read prepared statesmen's. The statements where factual, accurate and timely. They talked to local reporters they could trust. Those reports then get fed to the wire services so its not like the word doesn't get out.

Remember, mewspaper and wire reporters..Can Be good,....TV Reporters, vain shallow animals.

Dan Corjulo
The Hartford Courant

Didn't know you were with a paper, Dan. No intent in any way to malign you or good people that you work with.

I fully agree with your assessment, based on my experiences as a criminal lawyer. I don't think I have ever had a particularly good dealing with a tv reporter. OTOH, I have had, and have now, cordial relationships with some of the local newspaper people.

But they still get it wrong sometimes, even when I have known them well. One guy who sat through a preliminary hearing on a major case with me and walked the DA and I back to the courthouse, still got my name completely wrong. The local court beat reporter, who has since died of a heart attack, once got a simple fact wrong in a homicide case. It was a matter of some importance to the facts of the case. That error was carried throughout the paper for the entire 2 week trial, repeated almost daily in print. Despite the fact that I sat in the bar and had a cold one with him one night and directly called him on it. And this was one of the guys that we consider here to be better and more accurate people.

Recently one of the local replacements for this guy called our local court "federal court" after a drug trial of mine. I emailed her and explained that the federal court is in Philly and those guys make more $ than I do :D

She never did answer me back on that one.

But I do agree with your assessment. The problem is, when it is like it was at S37 yesterday, with literally dozens of reporters snooping and running about, it is hard to tell the wolves from the puppies.

Jim G

P.S. One of my co-workers said the satellite masts are still up at S37. So the reporters are still there. Do they have to issue a notam for those as obstructions? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
grattonja said:
I fully agree with your assessment, based on my experiences as a criminal lawyer. I don't think I have ever had a particularly good dealing with a tv reporter. OTOH, I have had, and have now, cordial relationships with some of the local newspaper people.

The few times I've been involved in something newsworthy (read something that can be sensationalized) and knew the real inside scoop, it was clear that even the newspaper guys (especially the wire services) weren't very careful with the facts. On one occasion I was present when a guy from AP was trying to get a friend (& co-conspiritor) to give him something juicy. My friend's comment was "Just make something up, obviously everyone else has" and later when reading that guy's report I could tell that's exactly what he did.

Now I have also been involved with stories that were intended to be educational rather than attention grabbing for the sake of attention alone, and the reporters in those situations seemed a lot more interested in getting things right.
 
One of my biggest frustrations is seeing the press get something wrong either unintentionally or intentionally (like when the "off the record" speaker has a particular axe to grind and spins the story). In my work I am bound by client confidentiality and cannot discuss their affairs and usually cannot even mention or acknowledge that they're a client due to potential "misunderstandings" that may arise.

I'm currently involved in a major bankruptcy and have had to live quietly with reporters completely misunderstanding court documents and misrepresenting the facts publicly.
 
Ken Ibold said:
As the guy who has worked in the media for more than 20 years, I would tend to agree with you.

During the JFK and Payne Stewart aftermaths, I had the privilege/misfortune of being one of the broadcast news talking heads. It started in the hours after JFK went down when MSNBC was broadcasting utter bull****. I called the news desk in New York sometime around 10 pm, pointing out the most egregious of errors. I got a snotty "what makes you the expert?" When I offered that I was editor in chief of Aviation Safety magazine, he put me on with a producer. That led to the trips to the studio and the floodgates opened. For the next two weeks, I would get calls from a variety of broadcast media. I would brief the producers on the significance of findings, tell them what I could surmise and what I would not conjecture about. Then when they'd patch me in with the anchor on the air I'd get some dumb-*** question that not only proved the time spent with the producer was wasted, but also that the broadcast news anchors are largely too stupid to tie their own shoes. Finally I drew the line when NBC wanted to send a satellite truck to my house for Dateline or something during my kid's birthday party. I still get the occasional call from a producer, most recently after the Teterboro runway overrun, but no way am I going to throw myself into that quagmire again. It was interesting after a career on one side of the media to be thrown to the other side. I discovered that you don't have to be good or smart to have a high-profile media job, you simply have to be aggressive and speak well under pressure.

I found the PBS radio people to be somewhat more thoughtful. The wire service guys were OK but too overworked to go much past superficial. The WSJ guy was good, but he was also a pilot.


Ken, I remember seeing you, you were great on TV, a real natural. We assigned Rinker Buck to the Kennedy story so we got great reporting, but way too much of it. NEVER TELL RINKER HE'S GOT UNLIMITED COLUMN INCHES, He'll use it...sorry Rink.

Yes, newspaper people can get it wrong and the wire guys are overworked. And certainly some reporter have agendas. I like to tell people to look for the older reporters or photographers. The young kids can be real gung-ho screw ups. I know I was when I started. Almost got myself arrested in Israel being to aggressive. Listen, its not a perfect system. It never can be.

As for off the record comments being axes to grind. That's at most only about 90% or 99% of the off the record stuff we get. Common on, that still leave 1%. :(
 
grattonja said:
Didn't know you were with a paper, Dan. No intent in any way to malign you or good people that you work with.

No offense taken. Like lawyers or elected officials, news media types take a fair amount of criticism. Comes with the territory. A few to many bad apples for are own good.
 
Back
Top