Red Arrows incident

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 9401
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Tommy »

CJS wrote:It's a tragic event and my thoughts go to all involved, but speculation? Oh there was plenty of that again.


Just dealing with the "speculation" point insofar as those of us with red/orange usernames are concerned, I'll try to put the grey area into black and white to see how difficult it is to straddle the line of what's important/newsworthy, and taste/appropriateness:

TL;DR - I think this thread to be fine, but these situations can be very hard to deal with and incredibly complex, and there's seldom right or wrong. Also, "it's reported that" is not "speculation".

Since Shoreham (though, actually we first started chatting about how we deal with this kind of stuff after Kev Whyman tragically lost his life a few weeks prior) "speculation" is becoming a bit of a buzzword.

The fundamental principle is that this is a forum for people to share and, much more importantly, discuss, news relating to airshows, aviation, etc. In one sense, it's exactly the same as Facebook and Twitter on a considerably smaller scale, in that this place is entirely what its members make of it (which is why it's silly for the "UKAR*se" (* to avoid the swear filter) forum to be judged as a whole as it frequently is, because of some views which are expressed by a couple of members. Much like if we were to deride the entirety of Twitter because of the minority of really disgusting trolls on there).

Battening down the hatches and censoring all ability to share news and discuss it following an incident is a practice I, and probably all of the other staffers, want zero part in. But, at the same time, Twitter and Facebook, being very much unmoderated for these purposes, is a rife breeding ground for the spread of false and misleading information, regardless of whether the originator of the information has good intentions or not. It always seems to me these things start because someone posts "from a mate there who says XYZ", and then that's shared across groups and communities, and before long it becomes "it's being reported as", and no-one has a clue where it comes from. Perhaps it's an outdated term describing what a reporter used to report, to now describe any T,D, or H saying something completely unvetted, and of dubious reliability.

We've seen the damage done on social media by accounts setting themselves up as reputable seeing red and making a full-on charge about a story that doesn't exist. I think a few years ago one particularly well-followed (and quite good) account spread news of a Tornado crash at RAF Marham, based on information given by someone on the fence, but what they didn't realise was that it was a practice emergency drill. Honest mistake, but the importance of awaiting official statements & confirmations is paramount. I think part of this is also the rush to be "first", too, which means that hunches might not be checked as robustly as they should have been. If you're "first" with the news, you get all the retweets, likes, shares, etc. that's fine for exotic airshow participation, but imo it crosses a line when it's about life threatening situations.

UKAR's Twitter was deliberately not drawn into an "it's been reported" line over this and other issues. We decided that the most value we could achieve, and most appropriate we could be, was to wait until the MoD, or some other official account released a quick statement, and simply share that. No-one from the enthusiast community needs to know of the urgency where we can't wait a few hours for an official statement.

I know This is Flight did a rolling broadcast and several "BREAKING" tweets, and that's ok, and a matter for them to decide how to play it. I did ask myself whether we really *needed* that kind of coverage, when we always know that the MoD, the RAF or some other official level of the armed forces will issue a statement within a few hours (as they did). I'm not saying UKAR's route was better, nor worse, nor am I attempting to single TIF out (before Alex jumps on me :grin:), but the above highlights that these things are complex, and many people handle them in very different ways.

So, on the face of it, there's the balance. We've got to allow the sharing of news whilst it's newsworthy, whilst attempting to steer clear of the mess of rumour & false information. Added to this mix is that these incidents develop very quickly, and it's very difficult for any of us to be on "standby" ready to jump on anything untoward. This is because, even if we were here 24/7, how do we know that something posted is untrue? The truth takes time. By the time we've worked something out, the situation has developed.

None of this is actually real "speculation" because I haven't got there yet. It's Chinese whispers.

From a moderating point of view, I and the rest of the team can do nothing to control who says what on Facebook, or Twitter, or other social media sites, forums, or websites. That's not our mandate, and that's not our responsibility.

It's incredibly difficult to make a judgement call on "it's being reported", because we have no way of determining that information. But taken in a loose definition, all "it's being reported" means is "someone is saying". Fine. We can deal with that, and only the most craven of idiots should take anything "someone is saying" as the unequivocal truth. What we *can* do is stop speculation when it appears here. That's direct "I think" kind of comments, not "it's reported as". Comments such as "from the footage online it looks like X, Y, & Z happened" have zero, often negative, value. Comments from people claiming they were at the scene and describing what they saw are probably more reliable, but this is probably the wrong place for them, so they would likely be encouraged to contact the relevant authority/body/organisation and describe what they saw.

But there is zero one size fits all, because these occasions are almost never the same, it's all entirely contextual, and decisions will be based on that, and what/how people post. If our policies were too rigid, we would be unable to adapt, too loose and we end up with rife speculation and little truth. So us staffers have to bear all of this in mind, and do what we can according to our judgement. We'll often discuss some of the more borderline posts with others to make sure whatever decision we take is justified, and that's how we have to run with it.

That's why we've operated an evolutionary approach to dealing with accidents, crashes, incidents, or whatever. And I consider it to be very much our duty to guard against that. But I'd hang up my red spurs in a heartbeat if our policy evolved to stopping all news and discussion every time there was a suspected accident.

Add to all of this is that these occasions can frequently end up tragically, as this one did, and so we also have to consider the bounds of taste, mood, likelihood of gutter press sniffing around, and our own emotions. As a moderator, it's horrid having to deal with something like this, but deal with it we must.

In this thread? I don't think there was any untoward speculation. No-one has said "I reckon", which is what speculation is. False news was put here from elsewhere, but that has been corrected by official accounts, but that's not speculation. So, hopefully, that gives an insight into something with on the face of it people are quick to say "astonishing the poor speculation going on here", that is actually, just from a volunteer modding pov is vastly complex.

Apologies for another essay. If I had had more time I would've written less, etc...

User avatar
CJS
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu 15 Jul 2010, 3:30 pm
Location: Hogwarts

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by CJS »

Pretty much, I agree with all of this Tommy. The only thing I think would be that this...

wv383 wrote:Latest report is that the pilot and his 'blue' ejected safely and have minor injuries only. Happened on takeoff for the return to Scampton. As mentioned, a suspected bird strike as they lifted. Aircraft circled to return and crew ejected in order that the aircraft came in on the airfield not outside the boundary.


...may as well be UKAR generated speculation as wv383 chooses not to reference their source. Someone on FC or elsewhere could easily say "over on UKAR someone is saying that..." The Daily M**l could report that "a leading aviation forum is suggesting that..."

I'm not suggesting it crosses the line of what the UKAR mods feel is acceptable, clearly that's none of my business, but to me it's speculation. If it's not, then link or at least list your source. Just my opinion, I've no intention of getting in to an argument about it before anyone starts (not you Tom I hasten to add :smile: )

Other than that, another spot on 'essay' :up:
"There's only one way of life, and that's your own"

User avatar
paullangford
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2012, 7:53 am

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by paullangford »

I'd like to congratulate the Daily Mail on reaching a new low this morning for publishing a photo of burning aircraft wreckage with the headline:

Pictured: The incredible moment Red Arrows pilot escaped crash fireball while engineer was trapped inside the plane as it plummeted to earth


I can't imagine Jonathan Bayliss families, friends, team mates horror in looking at that photo.
I found it totally insensitive of the Daily Mail to publish that photo, it wasn't necessary, we know the poor chap died....... I don't want to see a photo of him dying.
I'm not going to post a link to that photo out of respect, but if you feel as horrified as I did, please complain here.

https://www.ipso.co.uk/make-a-complaint/

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Brevet Cable »

Why single out the Mail.....other media outlets are also publishing it with similar headlines.

It's something that's happened in the media ever since cameras became portable enough to be easily carried.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
paullangford
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2012, 7:53 am

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by paullangford »

Brevet Cable wrote:Why single out the Mail.....other media outlets are also publishing it with similar headlines.

It's something that's happened in the media ever since cameras became portable enough to be easily carried.


It was the one that appeared on my screen this morning, & yes I'm sure others are publishing the same photo.
I still think it wasn't necessary.

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Brevet Cable »

Not the first time, won't be the last.....and that doesn't just apply to aviation incidents.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

Stagger2
Posts: 1940
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2011, 8:46 am

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Stagger2 »

It's an acknowledged fact that 'witness' reports that have forgotten/not-noted elements by them are mentally filled-in to complete the picture. Often it's the case that another 'witness' account is blended with the original to pollute the overall account!
Social Media is poison to a good first-hand account. A statement taken minutes after an event from 'Witness A' would be totally unlike a statement taken from the same person 2 days later! The endless enhancement of events by each commentator eventually degrades the subject to trash.
An non-detailed example in this event had a well-positioned witness see 'one good chute prior to impact' in an early interview. By the time of his second interview he had been appraised of the 2 POB & his account changed to include a 'seconds ejection seconds before impact!'
Just for reference, I have previously found "wv383" to be a reliable poster, however not on this occasion? FWIW Tommy I think your analysis of the governing criteria is spot-on! :up:

wv383
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 2:46 pm
Location: Fleet

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by wv383 »

It's not just the publication of the photos is distasteful it's also the fact that it was apparently a member of a spotters group that was hawking them around the news media trying to get as much as he could for them. This despite the fact that MOD had requested that this wasn't done and that any images such as these were submitted to them to help with the investigation before they were published.
Simon

User avatar
paullangford
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2012, 7:53 am

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by paullangford »

Brevet Cable wrote:Not the first time, won't be the last.....and that doesn't just apply to aviation incidents.


this is true..............sadly

User avatar
Wissam24
UKAR Staff
Posts: 8270
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013, 9:54 am
Location: London

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Wissam24 »

Removed a particularly and wildly inappropriate comment.
Twitter: @samwise24 | Flickr: samwise24 | Shamelessly copying LN Strike Eagle's avatar ideas since 2016

XP282
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu 22 Jan 2009, 9:55 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by XP282 »

I think this whole thread is a disgrace. We’re publicly calling for someone to lynched because he sold his photographs, we’re reporting that the pilot and engineer are safe and have minor injuries.

I’ve seen the photographs, my first reaction was ‘what an incredible’ photograph... followed by the realisation as my eyes were drawn to the fireball. It’s tragic, absolutely awful. I think here are are a lot of hypocrites out there who on one hand severely criticise someone for selling their photos, and on the other hand went straight to google and searched daily mail Reds arrows as soon as they knew there were photos.

I think the best thing that can happen is for this thread to be deleted and we all just take a moment to remember Cpl Bayliss.

One last thing, the publishing of photographs in a news paper, toilet paper, book, magazine or online does not prevent the MoD from using the same photos in their investigation.

Rest In Peace Jonathan.

User avatar
speedbird2639
Posts: 1349
Joined: Wed 13 Jul 2011, 11:35 am

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by speedbird2639 »

I've never understood the level of vitriol and hate which seems to get poured on people just because they happened to be 'in the right place at the right time' to film/ photograph a event. Pretty much ever since the camera was invented people have been taking photographs (and later film) of events which they felt were news worthy and might be of interest to other people who didn't witness the event in person.

Do the people who get their panties in such a knot switch off the tv if there is a documentary showing such clips as the Hindenburg crash or the Abraham Zapruder JFK assassination film or the myriad or documentaries there have been showing the Twin Towers day where nearly 3000 people lost their lives? I doubt it. So why the attacks on fotogs who have the 'good fortune' to be on the fence line when something more 'marketable' than usual happens.

I'm guessing its mainly down to jealousy that while they were stuck in the office someone else was having a day out and got to film something that they knew the 'red tops' would snap up for cash money. In my view there is no conflict of interest in being saddened that someone lost their life and recording the event in a photograph which someone subsequently buys off you. If you have a camera you should be recording the the important events and if you happen to record an event that others are interested in then you should be sharing those pictures. And if someone is willing to pay you for those photos then good luck to you.

If you think the photos being published is in bad taste then don't look at them and don't buy the product of those that do publish them. But to attack (including threatening someone's life, no matter how 'tongue in cheek' comment may have been) is completely wrong.

User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 9401
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Tommy »

Tommy wrote:(which is why it's silly for the "UKAR*se" (* to avoid the swear filter) forum [or a particular thread] to be judged as a whole as it frequently is, because of some views which are expressed by a couple of members. Much like if we were to deride the entirety of Twitter because of the minority of really disgusting trolls on there).
[My addition]

XP282 wrote:I think this whole thread is a disgrace. We’re publicly calling for someone to lynched because he sold his photographs, we’re reporting that the pilot and engineer are safe and have minor injuries.


Case in bloody point.

If the "disgrace" in your mind are the calls for lynching, (which I also think are stupid) then no, it's not the "whole" thread. Either read the whole thread before you criticise it, or stop exaggerating. Or both.

User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 9401
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Tommy »

speedbird2639 wrote:I'm guessing its mainly down to jealousy that while they were stuck in the office someone else was having a day out and got to film something that they knew the 'red tops' would snap up for cash money.


We've discussed a number of things on this forum over the years, but do you *really* want to be making the case/guess that people are jealous they didn't get to witness and take a picture of a fatal accident? That's considerably below-par of the calibre of thoughts & points you normally make, IMO.

speedbird2639 wrote:If you think the photos being published is in bad taste then don't look at them and don't buy the product of those that do publish them. But to attack (including threatening someone's life, no matter how 'tongue in cheek' comment may have been) is completely wrong.


With this, I agree. And not just "don't buy", don't promote either. I wouldn't have had a clue the DM had those pics had people on here and social media not given them the free press.

DonaldGrump
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon 23 Jan 2017, 6:57 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by DonaldGrump »

After an incident such as this I think it is quite normal for people who have an interest in aviation to discuss and yes speculate what may have happened.

What I have noticed in recent years these sad events seem to have generated threads that seem to be seen as an ideal soap box for some to tell others how to behave and how to live their lives.

My thoughts are with all at Scampton and all those touched by the very sad incident at Valley.

User avatar
Wissam24
UKAR Staff
Posts: 8270
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013, 9:54 am
Location: London

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Wissam24 »

speedbird2639 wrote:I've never understood the level of vitriol and hate which seems to get poured on people just because they happened to be 'in the right place at the right time' to film/ photograph a event.



Profiting off someone's death before the body is even buried.

Hope that's helped clear up your confusion.
Twitter: @samwise24 | Flickr: samwise24 | Shamelessly copying LN Strike Eagle's avatar ideas since 2016

DonaldGrump
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon 23 Jan 2017, 6:57 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by DonaldGrump »

Wissam24 wrote:
speedbird2639 wrote:I've never understood the level of vitriol and hate which seems to get poured on people just because they happened to be 'in the right place at the right time' to film/ photograph a event.



Profiting off someone's death before the body is even buried.

Hope that's helped clear up your confusion.


Do you know this person has profited? Might they not have been hoodwinked by the snakes at the Mail? If they have profited then let their conscience stand in judgement.

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Brevet Cable »

As this thread has turned from reporting the death of the engineer and morphed into a discussion on the rights and wrongs of one photographer's actions......

To those of you complaining ( and worse ) about his actions :
Depending on your age :
What did you do when the events of '9/11' were unfolding, or when the photographs of the aircraft impacts ( and the people jumping from the building ) were published?
What did you do when the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise was being shown, or the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the events of Bradford, Heysel & Hillsborough were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
More recently, what did you do when the events in Grenfell were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the Air France Concorde incident was unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
There are many, many other similar events I could cite, but you should get my gist by now.

Did you turn off your televisions & complain about the published images?
If so, good for you.
If not, then in my opinion you're sanctimonious hypocrites.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
Pen Pusher
Posts: 7138
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 6:34 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Pen Pusher »

Or some of us who are even older, watching the Vietnam war unfold on the television every night. Film of Buddhist monks setting fire to themselves on tea time news comes to mind.

Brian
The Future Of Photography Is Mirrorless

DfG on Facebook
BAMPhotography on Facebook

User avatar
Dan O'Hagan
Posts: 2279
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2016, 6:05 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Dan O'Hagan »

Rather like the chicken and egg, in an aviation incident discussion what comes first, the "mustn't speculate" or the "thoughts and prayers"? Either way, they're both forms of virtue signalling.

As for the photographer, I doubt the pictures were taken without his knowledge. Not the sort of thing one would post up on Flickr or Facebook. If the monies have been donated to a suitable charity, that's at least something, if they were hawked to the highest bidder for personal gain, then that's quite something else.

DonaldGrump
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon 23 Jan 2017, 6:57 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by DonaldGrump »

Dan O'Hagan wrote:Rather like the chicken and egg, in an aviation incident discussion what comes first, the "mustn't speculate" or the "thoughts and prayers"? Either way, they're both forms of virtue signalling.

As for the photographer, I doubt the pictures were taken without his knowledge. Not the sort of thing one would post up on Flickr or Facebook. If the monies have been donated to a suitable charity, that's at least something, if they were hawked to the highest bidder for personal gain, then that's quite something else.


As a journalist I am sure you would know? Perhaps the Mail wangled them out of the guy for nowt? Possible? "Do you mind if we use your pics..we will give you the credit!"


The guy might not even have thought of asking for payment....plenty of bods who are gullible enough around and certainly amongst those who hang around airfield perimeters.

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13725
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by Brevet Cable »

Pen Pusher wrote:Or some of us who are even older, watching the Vietnam war unfold on the television every night. Film of Buddhist monks setting fire to themselves on tea time news comes to mind.

I deliberately avoided any conflict-related incidents ( and yes, I'm old enough too )


As for the photograph in question, the media have published photographs of accidents and incidents for almost as long as photography has existed, let's not kid ourselves that it's something new.
Many of those images have been far worse and more graphic than this image.
Ever since cameras became generally available to the public, people have been selling images to the media. It's just easier for them to do so now.

Again with regards this particular image - when was it sold to the media for publication?
Given the conflicting information which was coming out at the time, it could simply be the case that the photographer didn't know the engineer was still in the aircraft at the time.
You could also argue against the publication of the various footage/images of the burnt-out airframe.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

vulcan558
Posts: 1117
Joined: Sat 06 Oct 2012, 9:45 pm

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by vulcan558 »

Not in good taste to show pictures of the burnt out jet with a Blanket draped over the cockpit.
Not nice to see knowing there a person under it,

User avatar
centaurus18
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 8:59 am
Location: Ex-Yeovil, now Southampton, UK
Contact:

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by centaurus18 »

Some of us might remember the RNHF Firefly accident at Duxford in 2003 - before social media came along.
Footage of that was sold to the news outlets less than 30 minutes after it occurred, before some members of the crew's families had been informed there had even been an incident.
Mark
'We’re in the stickiest situation, since Sticky the stick insect got stuck on a sticky bun.'

MingtheMerciless
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri 07 Apr 2017, 2:58 pm
Location: Under a wanderin' star

Re: Red Arrows incident

Post by MingtheMerciless »

Brevet Cable wrote:As this thread has turned from reporting the death of the engineer and morphed into a discussion on the rights and wrongs of one photographer's actions......

To those of you complaining ( and worse ) about his actions :
Depending on your age :
What did you do when the events of '9/11' were unfolding, or when the photographs of the aircraft impacts ( and the people jumping from the building ) were published?
What did you do when the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise was being shown, or the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the events of Bradford, Heysel & Hillsborough were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
More recently, what did you do when the events in Grenfell were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the Air France Concorde incident was unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
There are many, many other similar events I could cite, but you should get my gist by now.

Did you turn off your televisions & complain about the published images?
If so, good for you.
If not, then in my opinion you're sanctimonious hypocrites.


Spot-on! Horrible stuff has been appearing in the press since the year dot....and will continue to do so. Who took the pictures is an irrelevant side-show.

Edited to add: I'm just back from a few weeks in the 'States'; if you want to see poor reporting and news standards that's the place to go - watched a woman getting run over by a driverless vehicle last week (on a news channel and, no, it wasn't edited).