Spotted on Stuff just now:
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
22 February 2011
30 June 2010
Journalists and research
Stuff has a news article about the Rousillon crash of an Airbus A320 in 2008, where five Kiwis and two Germans were killed.
About halfway into the article is the line, "Flight data showed that the pilots did not receive accurate angle of attack readings, meaning they did not know the angle the wings were to the ground. " It's a small thing, but angle of attack is the angle between the wing and the oncoming flow of air over the wing.
If a journalist and their editor can't get the small facts right, how can we expect them to get the big facts right?
About halfway into the article is the line, "Flight data showed that the pilots did not receive accurate angle of attack readings, meaning they did not know the angle the wings were to the ground. " It's a small thing, but angle of attack is the angle between the wing and the oncoming flow of air over the wing.
If a journalist and their editor can't get the small facts right, how can we expect them to get the big facts right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)