Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re: [OT] Space shuttle media

Subject: Re: [OM] Re: [OT] Space shuttle media
From: ClassicVW@xxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:54:01 EST
Jay,
As you say again and again, you feel strongly about this, but your feelings 
are preventing you from "seeing" my words as you read them. I am not 
defending sensationalism, (as I've said several times) my feeling is this 
"investigation" was a sham and it serves no one's interest to keep the public 
in the dark. You say it's been publicly known for years they survived. Please 
cite the government's report to that effect. I think it's just that the 
rumors got out and are being mistaken for what NASA admitted. 
How are my comments about NASA "offensive in tone" to you? Now you know the 
"tone" of my comments? Let me tell you something else you're not going to 
like to hear- NASA killed those astronauts in the same vein as if I hand you 
the keys to my car which I know has no brakes. I would be blamed for your 
death, and certainly prosecuted for my actions.
Certainly the answer is responsibility on the part of the media. But saying 
they (and the American people) can't handle the truth, that we'd do something 
irresponsible with it, so therefore we can't be told the truth is ridiculous. 
What NASA is worried about is the fact that people are a lot smarter than 
they're given credit for, and with a set of complete facts people will come 
down hard on them.

George S.

jmaynard@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:

<< They haven't been kept from the public. It's been publicly known for years
 that the crew survived the breakup of the orbiter and were killed by impact
 with the ocean. The disagreement is over reporting what the crew did and
 said during those last seconds of life. I don't see that those words and
 actions, whatever they may have been, shed any light whatsoever on the fact
 - also publicly known for years - that the launch should have never
 happened, and that the people with the technical knowledge that recommended
 that the maunch not happen were overruled by managers for political reasons.
 Your comments about NASA, while offensive in tone to me (as a former NASA
 contractor at the Johnson Space Center), are part of the public debate - but
 the question has already been settled, for better or worse.
 
 The fastest way to lose this freedom, however, is to succumb to the
 temptation to pander to the demonstrated public desire for sensationalism.
 The way to grease that slippery slope is get more and more excessive in the
 images shown, which in turn will fuel a public backlash.
 
 The answer is responsibility...which the media seem to have forgotten even
 exists as a concept. We, as photographers, have a duty to not only our
 viewers, but our subjects as well. What is gained by showing the face of an
 injured accident victim, or a crying mother looking at her baby on an
 ambulance stretcher? This is the photographic equivalent of asking that same
 mother "How do you feel right now?" DAMMIT, HOW IS SHE SUPPOSED TO FEEL??!!
 
 As you might guess, I feel pretty strongly over this issue. I'm not going to
 apologize for it, either; I spent too many years of my life working to help
 people in those situations, as a volunteer, to accept that the media has a
 larger duty to hurt them worse in the name of "freedom of the press".
  >>

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz