Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Quick takes
Click here and then scroll down for the latest fire and EMS news from STATter911.com
UPDATE - Final count is 9 dead in DC Metro crash: It is, by far, the deadliest crash in Metro's 33-year-history. One train plowed into the rear of a stopped train north of Fort Totten on Metro's Red Line.
Late last night, city sources confirmed there were at least 9 dead and more than 70 injured. At a morning press conference, Mayor Adrian Fenty says the official death toll was at seven. Around 10:00 AM city sources again confirm the number of dead is nine, with five bodies removed from the train this morning.
Prior to the removal, firefighters had been using a camera to view parts of the crumbled car that were not accessible.
As of 1:30 PM city sources indicate the number of dead will remain at nine.
Mayor Fenty expects that by 5:00 PM the city will be able to provide a final update on the number of dead.
Three-alarms were sounded to bring in enough fire and EMS crews to handle the injured. A number of the victims had to be cut from the wreckage. More bodies were discovered during recovery operations as firefighters made their way into the rear car of the stopped train that had been crush by the second train.
Watch raw video from morning press conference.
Watch live coverage from WUSA9.com (when available).
Where are the PIOs?: With a large section of the city shut down, Metro's Red Line at a standstill, and loved ones desperately looking for information, the city went into an information blackout mode within the first hour of the crisis. While at least one fire department PIO provided initial information in the first minutes, sources within city government tell STATter911.com that word came from Mayor Adrian Fenty's press office that no more interviews were to be done, or information relayed to reporters until a 7:15 PM press conference by the mayor. At about the same time, TV photographers and live truck crews were suddenly pushed back from vantage points where the wreckage could be seen. Many of these spots were out of the way of first responders working to treat patients. Reporters and photographers report being confronted by police and other officials even though they were on private property a considerable distance from the crash site. Law enforcement sources familiar with the situation say the efforts were made because of concerns by city and Metro officials that photographers might get pictures of bodies being removed from the train. A live truck crew with 9NEWS NOW (my station) was forced off an overpass and ordered to leave the microwave truck behind, cutting off a line of communications for the reporter to relay information to the public. A police PIO later intervened and allowed the operator to retrieve the truck. More on this information policy as we know it.
Staffing plan for PGFD: As we wait for the top secret staffing plan for the new fiscal year to be revealed in Prince George's County, Maryland, STATter911.com has obtained the schedule for the temporary plan that takes the cash strapped department through June 30. Word from officials has been the July 1 plan will permanently remove career staffing from some stations. Click here to see how the rotating schedule, now in place, plays out over the next eight day.
Mystery siren revealed: It turns out the siren I heard in my neighborhood Saturday, and a few years ago, comes from a nearby private school. They have a weather alert system on the campus. Sources familiar with the incident say officials are supposed to alert the neighborhood when the siren is tested. That didn't happen on Saturday. Click here for more.
Growing pains: In West Brookfield, Massachusetts a house uncovered a pot growing operation. Firefighters found more than 120 plants in four rooms of the house. Click here to watch the story.
Controversial chief leaving: Gee Dave, that headline really narrows it down. This one is the resignation of Reno, Nevada Chief Paul Wagner. Read the details.
Neither rain, nor snow, nor sleet ... : In Oberlech, Austria that could be the motto of the fire brigade. Firegeezer has found a most unusual primary attack vehicle at this ski resort. Check it out.
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
You've got the wrong link for the Austrian vehicle:
http://www.firegeezer.com/2009/06/22/snow-is-no-problem/
http://www.firegeezer.com/2009/06/22/snow-is-no-problem/
# posted by 
: June 23, 2009 2:22 AM
: June 23, 2009 2:22 AM 
Regarding media blackout at the incident, were news helicopters restricted?
Are news helicopters used/allowed in DC?
Are news helicopters used/allowed in DC?
# posted by : June 23, 2009 6:13 AM
: June 23, 2009 6:13 AM
In 1906 a very similar train wreck took place in almost the exact same location along the railroad in Fort Totten. 53 people were killed. Congress mandated changes to the railroad industry to prevent rail cars from "telescoping" during a train collision. I have written and researched the train wreck in 1906 for many years. I am dumbfounded as to why the METRO cars telescoped when they should have layed up alongside each other in an "accordian" fashion which would have prevented so much death and injury.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 6:26 AM
: June 23, 2009 6:26 AM
My guess for the news blackout was Mayor Fenty didn't want any of his agency heads geeting more media time that him.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 8:16 AM
: June 23, 2009 8:16 AM
Something that I noticed that the rest of the media seemed to not notice was that the FBI was there on the scene almost IMMEDIATELY (as reported by a competing station) even before the rest of the FD and DCPD units got there! You could seethem there in their jackets and vsts within the first 10-15 minutes down at trackside! Almost as if they had "the jump" on something!
MAYBE that was why the "blackout"? Sometimes there needs to be a checking of information, checking of facts (there was MUCH speculation and "analysis" by the "reporters" long before REAL information was available from the scene) and possibly that was why the Mayor wanted to hold an organized press conference so everybody got the SAME and VERIFIED information instead of speculation.
I can also see why the "media" was moved from the overpass. We all got to see the trainwreck and that was ALL there was to see! It is NOT of "vital importance" to see human bodies extracted from the wreckage. It is NOT of "vital importance" nor does it affect our "need to know" to see bloody and frightened people milling about. That ONLY affects the ratings and careers of the "journalists" who want to "tell a story".
The Mayor and the Officials of the PD, FD and Metro handled things in a very concise, informative and easy-to-understand manner that gave everyone both present at the scene and viewing from TV EVERYTHING that was needed to deal with the situation at hand. People needed to know that there was a trainwreck on Metro that resulted in fatalities and delays. That was done. People needed to knw that the situation was being handled by competent and confident personnel. That was done and explained. People needed to see that there WAS, in fact, a bad situation. That was done in a clear, concise manner that ANYONE could understand by seeing the pictures. NO "analysis" or "explanations" were needed as the result would still be the same.
The emergency personnel and support agencies (Metro, NTSB, FBI, CSX and railroad heavy-equipment operators, etc.)need room and their full attention to deal with the situation at hand and this was doen by making the scene, and avenues of ingress and egress CLEAR of distractions.
It looks like, for a change, that the Inciedent Command System worked just like it should! Everybody got there in a timely manner, everybody got their skills and equipment promptly to work, injury and loss of life seems to be held to a minimum, rescue and evacuation was fairly orderly and prompt and well overseen by FD and PD personnel, traffic control was fairly well managed, scene security and control was maintained and PIOs did their jobs properly yet also knew enough to take orders from higher in the Chain of Command when the time was right.
The "high shots" from the "helicopter" were VERY GOOD! Loked SO good that they could have been from a building they were so steady and clear! Good sharing of info between MOST stations (as was that "helicopter" footage). Also looks like the press didn't badger the emergency workers as much as they usually do. (I know that in my decades of emergency work there is nothing more couterproductive than the "press" intruding into my work area, often dangerous, and asking the OBVIOUS "what happened" or trying to "tell a story" while blocking my path to/from my work area which interferes with the delivery of emergency services.)
This incident appears to be VERY well handled by ALL concerned and EVERYBODY knows what happened. This should serve as a model for future situtations.
MAYBE that was why the "blackout"? Sometimes there needs to be a checking of information, checking of facts (there was MUCH speculation and "analysis" by the "reporters" long before REAL information was available from the scene) and possibly that was why the Mayor wanted to hold an organized press conference so everybody got the SAME and VERIFIED information instead of speculation.
I can also see why the "media" was moved from the overpass. We all got to see the trainwreck and that was ALL there was to see! It is NOT of "vital importance" to see human bodies extracted from the wreckage. It is NOT of "vital importance" nor does it affect our "need to know" to see bloody and frightened people milling about. That ONLY affects the ratings and careers of the "journalists" who want to "tell a story".
The Mayor and the Officials of the PD, FD and Metro handled things in a very concise, informative and easy-to-understand manner that gave everyone both present at the scene and viewing from TV EVERYTHING that was needed to deal with the situation at hand. People needed to know that there was a trainwreck on Metro that resulted in fatalities and delays. That was done. People needed to knw that the situation was being handled by competent and confident personnel. That was done and explained. People needed to see that there WAS, in fact, a bad situation. That was done in a clear, concise manner that ANYONE could understand by seeing the pictures. NO "analysis" or "explanations" were needed as the result would still be the same.
The emergency personnel and support agencies (Metro, NTSB, FBI, CSX and railroad heavy-equipment operators, etc.)need room and their full attention to deal with the situation at hand and this was doen by making the scene, and avenues of ingress and egress CLEAR of distractions.
It looks like, for a change, that the Inciedent Command System worked just like it should! Everybody got there in a timely manner, everybody got their skills and equipment promptly to work, injury and loss of life seems to be held to a minimum, rescue and evacuation was fairly orderly and prompt and well overseen by FD and PD personnel, traffic control was fairly well managed, scene security and control was maintained and PIOs did their jobs properly yet also knew enough to take orders from higher in the Chain of Command when the time was right.
The "high shots" from the "helicopter" were VERY GOOD! Loked SO good that they could have been from a building they were so steady and clear! Good sharing of info between MOST stations (as was that "helicopter" footage). Also looks like the press didn't badger the emergency workers as much as they usually do. (I know that in my decades of emergency work there is nothing more couterproductive than the "press" intruding into my work area, often dangerous, and asking the OBVIOUS "what happened" or trying to "tell a story" while blocking my path to/from my work area which interferes with the delivery of emergency services.)
This incident appears to be VERY well handled by ALL concerned and EVERYBODY knows what happened. This should serve as a model for future situtations.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 11:39 AM
: June 23, 2009 11:39 AM
It's a shame that we, the Media, can't charge officials with "Obstruction of Truth" as fast they they can charge someone with Obstruction of Justice. I find it encredible that someone who swears to uphold the constitution is one of the first to disavow it by restricting freedom of the press.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 11:52 AM
: June 23, 2009 11:52 AM
Let me play devil's advocate here. So what you are saying is that it is okay for government to decide what we can and can't shoot or show on TV and the Internet?
That the mayor, police chief, fire chief, governor or president should be the editor-in-chief.
We are not talking about any claims that fire, police or rescue operations were being hindered.
In doing so, it was okay to basically confiscate the transmission capabilities of a TV station. The last I heard that was one of the ways those officials were supposed to reach the public.
You also think its okay that in a time the public needs information from their government officials on what they should do, it was okay to go into a news black out. What would be wrong with having a public information specialist talk to reporters giving them constant updates on what is known while we wait for the elected officials to get ready?
This isn't about anyone's ego, including mine. It is about giving the public information when they need it, which in this case was now.
Also, to my knowledge, no TV stations in this market show dead bodies on the air. We usually aren't even allowed to show covered bodies going into a morgue wagon. That went out in the 90s. The public officials know that.
So give me some answers to my questions. I am intrigued by your position.
Statter
That the mayor, police chief, fire chief, governor or president should be the editor-in-chief.
We are not talking about any claims that fire, police or rescue operations were being hindered.
In doing so, it was okay to basically confiscate the transmission capabilities of a TV station. The last I heard that was one of the ways those officials were supposed to reach the public.
You also think its okay that in a time the public needs information from their government officials on what they should do, it was okay to go into a news black out. What would be wrong with having a public information specialist talk to reporters giving them constant updates on what is known while we wait for the elected officials to get ready?
This isn't about anyone's ego, including mine. It is about giving the public information when they need it, which in this case was now.
Also, to my knowledge, no TV stations in this market show dead bodies on the air. We usually aren't even allowed to show covered bodies going into a morgue wagon. That went out in the 90s. The public officials know that.
So give me some answers to my questions. I am intrigued by your position.
Statter
Follow the link below for the 1906 train wreck.
http://www3.gendisasters.com/district-columbia/574/terra-cotta%2C-dc-train-wreck%2C-dec-1907
http://www3.gendisasters.com/district-columbia/574/terra-cotta%2C-dc-train-wreck%2C-dec-1907
# posted by : June 23, 2009 1:12 PM
: June 23, 2009 1:12 PM
Maybe the blackout came because you all (the media) were showing the faces of the victims? Maybe because you all (the media) don't have any tact about the "freedoms" you are given?
Imagine seeing your loved one being carried out of there by the firefighters.
Get a clue!
Imagine seeing your loved one being carried out of there by the firefighters.
Get a clue!
# posted by : June 23, 2009 2:36 PM
: June 23, 2009 2:36 PM
First off, I didn't see any "news blackout" and I watched the whole coverage. The media were told to leave the area and there was constant video from the remote chopper shots. Also constant commentary. The only thing I noticed was that the information had to be cleared from a single point and that was through the command center and mayor. Seemed pretty clear to me. The command center and mayor kept everybody up to date with CONFIRMED info and I think that kept worry and misinformation to a minimum.
I know I sure get sick of news people telling me "what I have just seen" as if my eyes are lying to me or I'm a baby. Or some self-appointed "expert" who can't tell the difference between a fence and a "barricade".
I didn't see any "obstruction of truth" or "obstruction of justice". I just saw the people in charge of a very bad situation trying to maintain control of the scene and keep things moving in an orderly manner. I didn't see any "communications blackout" and I didn't see any "confiscation of transmission capability". The PIOs DID update the news people WHEN THEY HAD INFORMATION TO PASS ON! It was a slow tedious operation and you just can't have something "breaking" every second! And rather than feeding redundant info, the PIOs just waited until they had GOOD CONFIRMED info to give out! Great idea! Maybe the "journalists" could do a little "confirmation" and "investigation" rather than "telling a story" or telling the public "what you have just seen", "what the Chief REALLY meant" or "you are now seeing" as if the public are in kindergarten.
All of the stations were allowed to keep control of their equipment, nothing was seized or taken away. Remember, the scene of an emergency is under the lawful control of the emergency personnel!
And the last I heard, "media" are NOT considered emergency personnel at least under the code of law. Therefore, they too, must obey lawful orders to move to new positions, and they too must make do with the information as it becomes available from whatever source. Or...they could do what they normally do and fabricate and speculate and analyze to fill up dead air time.
I know I sure get sick of news people telling me "what I have just seen" as if my eyes are lying to me or I'm a baby. Or some self-appointed "expert" who can't tell the difference between a fence and a "barricade".
I didn't see any "obstruction of truth" or "obstruction of justice". I just saw the people in charge of a very bad situation trying to maintain control of the scene and keep things moving in an orderly manner. I didn't see any "communications blackout" and I didn't see any "confiscation of transmission capability". The PIOs DID update the news people WHEN THEY HAD INFORMATION TO PASS ON! It was a slow tedious operation and you just can't have something "breaking" every second! And rather than feeding redundant info, the PIOs just waited until they had GOOD CONFIRMED info to give out! Great idea! Maybe the "journalists" could do a little "confirmation" and "investigation" rather than "telling a story" or telling the public "what you have just seen", "what the Chief REALLY meant" or "you are now seeing" as if the public are in kindergarten.
All of the stations were allowed to keep control of their equipment, nothing was seized or taken away. Remember, the scene of an emergency is under the lawful control of the emergency personnel!
And the last I heard, "media" are NOT considered emergency personnel at least under the code of law. Therefore, they too, must obey lawful orders to move to new positions, and they too must make do with the information as it becomes available from whatever source. Or...they could do what they normally do and fabricate and speculate and analyze to fill up dead air time.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 3:12 PM
: June 23, 2009 3:12 PM
The blackout I was talking about is an information blackout. At a time of crisis the people whose job it is to provide information to the public through the media were ordered not to do interviews, not by the fire or police chief, but by press people in the mayor's office.
I believe from my experience in the news business and public safety there are some very good PIOs in the city government who know how to relay timely information when a crisis occurs and don't need everything approved by the mayor's office. I thought that's where they earned their money. If not, why have them?
As for showing faces, yes I have heard that argument a few times in my career. So, again I ask the question. Do you want the police chief or other public officials to decide what we can shoot and when we can shoot it? What should should be the rules for this?
My understanding of things is when a public official has control of this it is a form of censorship. I am getting the impression that you believe that is a freedom worth giving up in return for not showing people's faces.
Read this article and look at the comments and give me your thoughts about showing faces and what rules should be in place. Should none of these Pulitzer Prize winning images of firefighters doing heroic work not been shown because they show faces?
http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2008/12/thousand-words-behind-picture.html
And in an effort to keep the media from showing bodies, you believe it is okay to basically seize a TV truck? The truck had been there with the permission of fire department PIOs through most of the rescue process.
Not trying to defend all of the ills of the media, but I aminterested in your thoughts in connection with the facts presented.
Thanks for the input and responses.
Statter
I believe from my experience in the news business and public safety there are some very good PIOs in the city government who know how to relay timely information when a crisis occurs and don't need everything approved by the mayor's office. I thought that's where they earned their money. If not, why have them?
As for showing faces, yes I have heard that argument a few times in my career. So, again I ask the question. Do you want the police chief or other public officials to decide what we can shoot and when we can shoot it? What should should be the rules for this?
My understanding of things is when a public official has control of this it is a form of censorship. I am getting the impression that you believe that is a freedom worth giving up in return for not showing people's faces.
Read this article and look at the comments and give me your thoughts about showing faces and what rules should be in place. Should none of these Pulitzer Prize winning images of firefighters doing heroic work not been shown because they show faces?
http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2008/12/thousand-words-behind-picture.html
And in an effort to keep the media from showing bodies, you believe it is okay to basically seize a TV truck? The truck had been there with the permission of fire department PIOs through most of the rescue process.
Not trying to defend all of the ills of the media, but I aminterested in your thoughts in connection with the facts presented.
Thanks for the input and responses.
Statter
"The PIOs DID update the news people WHEN THEY HAD INFORMATION TO PASS ON! It was a slow tedious operation and you just can't have something "breaking" every second! And rather than feeding redundant info, the PIOs just waited until they had GOOD CONFIRMED info to give out!"
The above is very well said. In today's instant communication and 24 hour news cycle, everyone wants info constantly and they want it now. As this was a long drawn out incident without a lot of new things occurring, there just wasn't anything to really share all of the time.
Usually at major incidents the PIO for the FD gives regular updates every hour or so, but that can get over done as too often we see the PIO basically rehash all that's already been said and not be able to give any new info. If there isn't any new info or any updates to the old info, there isn't any need to make any comments.
I agree that the mayor's people who issued the blackout didn't handle the situation well, but even if they allowed the FD PIO to give regular updates he wouldn't have had much to add and would have only been inundated with the same speculative questions from the media which he of course cannot answer.
The above is very well said. In today's instant communication and 24 hour news cycle, everyone wants info constantly and they want it now. As this was a long drawn out incident without a lot of new things occurring, there just wasn't anything to really share all of the time.
Usually at major incidents the PIO for the FD gives regular updates every hour or so, but that can get over done as too often we see the PIO basically rehash all that's already been said and not be able to give any new info. If there isn't any new info or any updates to the old info, there isn't any need to make any comments.
I agree that the mayor's people who issued the blackout didn't handle the situation well, but even if they allowed the FD PIO to give regular updates he wouldn't have had much to add and would have only been inundated with the same speculative questions from the media which he of course cannot answer.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 4:57 PM
: June 23, 2009 4:57 PM
Very good points. But this was in the first hour and few minutes after the wreck occurred.
If nothing else, isn't important to let the public know what is going on and the FD is handling it?
Just a thought.
Thanks for the input.
Statter
If nothing else, isn't important to let the public know what is going on and the FD is handling it?
Just a thought.
Thanks for the input.
Statter
One has to wonder why the mayor was even involved. The trains do not belong to Wash DC, they belong to METRO.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 5:39 PM
: June 23, 2009 5:39 PM
Those of you who think that its ok to control the press, I suggest you turn to CNN and watch whats happening right this minute in Iran where the government controls...or at least trys to control what you see, hear, eat, drink, dress in and think.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 5:41 PM
: June 23, 2009 5:41 PM
I happen to like the idea of a free press.
Had this event been a terrorist incident, then the footage (even if it had been of the injured and dead) would have been an important part of the story, and like it or not the emotional impact of those images plays a role in politics. Those images could be useful for reconstructing the events and the time line of rescue and recovery. They could help document the evidence of what the scene looked like. I'm against banning news crews from the scene, especially since I see more and more first responders using their cell phones or helmet cams to record information.
I don't know what will happen in Iran, but it seems as though 20 seconds of video of a woman dying will be the fulcrum needed to help bring about change there. I am very confident that the Ahmadinejad and Khamenei wish they could have prevented that particular image from escaping their net. Given that Iran is a totalitarian regime, is anyone here advocating that the government decide what news is allowed to be broadcast?
I wish that the news stations went with less of the, "If it bleeds it leads", but let us all be honest, about what draws in eyeballs: sex, violence, and disaster. I suppose we could all decide to get our news from NPR (and I bet a lot of reporters would love to have the time to develop a story that those reporters have), but I don't blame stations for reporting on sensationalistic stories if that is what their audience watches.
This happened to be an instance where the mayhem was local, and it made sense for your local stations to report it. If they had all decided to run with their first story being about a shark attack caught on video, and the attack took place in Australia, I'd be the first to argue they were behaving like ghouls.
Someone pointed out that the press is increasingly hamstrung with the instant news cycle that we live with, and I agree. Americans are losing the skill of delayed gratification. We demand everything immediately, from our food to our news. I happen to find the first news reports from any emergent situation to be full of confused and conflicting stories. I don't think I've ever been the first unit on the scene and had a coherent witness report or perfect immediate scene size-up. Why would I expect the news to be any different.
I'd also like to point out (Wow, I sound like the President), that a NYTimes reporter recently escaped from the Taliban. He had been a prisoner for 7 months. There had not been any reports on his being taken as a hostage during this time. The CIA/FBI had advised papers that based upon the lessons of Daniel Pearl, the press should not publicize these events, but ignore them. An interesting example, in that any news agency could have "broken" the story, and had a field day with it. When they want to, the press can run silent and run deep.
The first amendment guarantees the freedom of the press, but it doesn't guarantee that I have to watch or listen to them. Exercise your basic right of self control, and change channels, or better yet, turn it off.
On that note, Dave I enjoy the fact that you often have the immediate post followed by often days and weeks of follow-up posts as the story develops.
Had this event been a terrorist incident, then the footage (even if it had been of the injured and dead) would have been an important part of the story, and like it or not the emotional impact of those images plays a role in politics. Those images could be useful for reconstructing the events and the time line of rescue and recovery. They could help document the evidence of what the scene looked like. I'm against banning news crews from the scene, especially since I see more and more first responders using their cell phones or helmet cams to record information.
I don't know what will happen in Iran, but it seems as though 20 seconds of video of a woman dying will be the fulcrum needed to help bring about change there. I am very confident that the Ahmadinejad and Khamenei wish they could have prevented that particular image from escaping their net. Given that Iran is a totalitarian regime, is anyone here advocating that the government decide what news is allowed to be broadcast?
I wish that the news stations went with less of the, "If it bleeds it leads", but let us all be honest, about what draws in eyeballs: sex, violence, and disaster. I suppose we could all decide to get our news from NPR (and I bet a lot of reporters would love to have the time to develop a story that those reporters have), but I don't blame stations for reporting on sensationalistic stories if that is what their audience watches.
This happened to be an instance where the mayhem was local, and it made sense for your local stations to report it. If they had all decided to run with their first story being about a shark attack caught on video, and the attack took place in Australia, I'd be the first to argue they were behaving like ghouls.
Someone pointed out that the press is increasingly hamstrung with the instant news cycle that we live with, and I agree. Americans are losing the skill of delayed gratification. We demand everything immediately, from our food to our news. I happen to find the first news reports from any emergent situation to be full of confused and conflicting stories. I don't think I've ever been the first unit on the scene and had a coherent witness report or perfect immediate scene size-up. Why would I expect the news to be any different.
I'd also like to point out (Wow, I sound like the President), that a NYTimes reporter recently escaped from the Taliban. He had been a prisoner for 7 months. There had not been any reports on his being taken as a hostage during this time. The CIA/FBI had advised papers that based upon the lessons of Daniel Pearl, the press should not publicize these events, but ignore them. An interesting example, in that any news agency could have "broken" the story, and had a field day with it. When they want to, the press can run silent and run deep.
The first amendment guarantees the freedom of the press, but it doesn't guarantee that I have to watch or listen to them. Exercise your basic right of self control, and change channels, or better yet, turn it off.
On that note, Dave I enjoy the fact that you often have the immediate post followed by often days and weeks of follow-up posts as the story develops.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 5:51 PM
: June 23, 2009 5:51 PM
Come on Dave, and other media types, you know there are ways of showing the scene without showing faces. Maybe a 5 second delay or avoid showing the victims all together. But, in order to get the best ratings you need to show graphic images.
Apply common sense and compassion to the victims and their families. It can't be that hard? I'm sure backing the cameras up served many purposes.
As to the other comment about Iran; apples and oranges don't compare. The media has free range here in the USA. Nobody shot here in a while for taking pictures.
Apply common sense and compassion to the victims and their families. It can't be that hard? I'm sure backing the cameras up served many purposes.
As to the other comment about Iran; apples and oranges don't compare. The media has free range here in the USA. Nobody shot here in a while for taking pictures.
# posted by : June 23, 2009 11:22 PM
: June 23, 2009 11:22 PM
Dave I believe the Media Blackout could be labeled as SOCIALISM. They will only tell and show you what they want you to hear.
# posted by : June 24, 2009 12:18 AM
: June 24, 2009 12:18 AM
Interesting point, but no, you can't blur faces on the fly during live coverage, even with a 5 second delay.
Again, read this article http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2008/12/thousand-words-behind-picture.html and let's discuss the covering of faces a bit more. I can tell you there are official images from the scene where faces aren't blurred.
Statter
Again, read this article http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2008/12/thousand-words-behind-picture.html and let's discuss the covering of faces a bit more. I can tell you there are official images from the scene where faces aren't blurred.
Statter
Anonymous June 23, 2009 11:22 PM
How much freedom in reporting have we seen in Iraq and Afghanistan? The US military learned a lesson from Vietnam.
The 4th Estate exists to keep governments honest, the minute that they start to curtail the freedoms of the press, is the minute that it becomes easier to curtail my other rights.
And although this isn't Iran, ask yourself, why does it take two weeks to review a dashboard camera in the Oklahoma incident. It was an attempt to spin the press. How many US reporters have been killed since September 11? What about those two young ladies in North Korea.
The advertising minutes that result from higher ratings with disaster reporting, means more money to spend on reporting on something else that isn't as exciting, but vitally more important.
As we say here in Texas, "They can have my copy of the NYT or WSJ, when they pry it from my cold dead fingers."
How much freedom in reporting have we seen in Iraq and Afghanistan? The US military learned a lesson from Vietnam.
The 4th Estate exists to keep governments honest, the minute that they start to curtail the freedoms of the press, is the minute that it becomes easier to curtail my other rights.
And although this isn't Iran, ask yourself, why does it take two weeks to review a dashboard camera in the Oklahoma incident. It was an attempt to spin the press. How many US reporters have been killed since September 11? What about those two young ladies in North Korea.
The advertising minutes that result from higher ratings with disaster reporting, means more money to spend on reporting on something else that isn't as exciting, but vitally more important.
As we say here in Texas, "They can have my copy of the NYT or WSJ, when they pry it from my cold dead fingers."
# posted by : June 24, 2009 9:03 AM
: June 24, 2009 9:03 AM
The Media coverage of this terrible tragedy was quite good. For the comments about PIO being restricted, that is nothing more than opinions of a few Sensationalists. Statter you know very well there are scenes where Life is hanging in the balance that
faces showing extent of human suffering just isnot/cannot be put on TV etc. Who among us would want facial and body images of Traumatic Injuries sustained by their Loved ones to be plastered all over the Media? Yes the US Constitution does say Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. There was absolutely no obstruction of news and on scene operations. The DCFD had their personnel working tirelessly trying to inside the mangled metro cars to bring innocent souls out of harm's way. The DCFD Fire Chief did give periodical updates as to what,how,who, when, and why the DCFD Firefighters/Paramedics were carrying out their job. The same applies to other Authorities. ie; NTSB, Mayor Fenty and others. The absolute disgusting mention of such
words about obstructing what as happening was an absolute shameful disgrace to the Profession of Journalists. Those who think otherwise are nothing more than Sensationalist glory seekers. News mongers with no concept nor respect for Human compasion and the suffering all those innocent souls. Statter you know better than to speak in defense of this
immature juvenile disgusting thing. Let us all stop and think, this was aterrible Major Mass Casualty Incident. It might have been more Professioanl if the Media focused their job on recognizing the efforts done by all. This is especially important to speak well of The DCFD Firefighters and Paramedics who performed above and beyond their expectations given the actual scene and areas to work within.
faces showing extent of human suffering just isnot/cannot be put on TV etc. Who among us would want facial and body images of Traumatic Injuries sustained by their Loved ones to be plastered all over the Media? Yes the US Constitution does say Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. There was absolutely no obstruction of news and on scene operations. The DCFD had their personnel working tirelessly trying to inside the mangled metro cars to bring innocent souls out of harm's way. The DCFD Fire Chief did give periodical updates as to what,how,who, when, and why the DCFD Firefighters/Paramedics were carrying out their job. The same applies to other Authorities. ie; NTSB, Mayor Fenty and others. The absolute disgusting mention of such
words about obstructing what as happening was an absolute shameful disgrace to the Profession of Journalists. Those who think otherwise are nothing more than Sensationalist glory seekers. News mongers with no concept nor respect for Human compasion and the suffering all those innocent souls. Statter you know better than to speak in defense of this
immature juvenile disgusting thing. Let us all stop and think, this was aterrible Major Mass Casualty Incident. It might have been more Professioanl if the Media focused their job on recognizing the efforts done by all. This is especially important to speak well of The DCFD Firefighters and Paramedics who performed above and beyond their expectations given the actual scene and areas to work within.
# posted by : June 27, 2009 12:40 PM
: June 27, 2009 12:40 PM
Part 1
Let's be clear the showing of faces and the information are two different issues.
My point about the information is that I have confirmed, and so has The Washington Post and other news organizations, that the PIOs were ordered not to do interviews very early in this event. This came from the mayor's press office. It is fact.
The public at that point needs information about what is going on so they can make good decisions. It involves concern about loved ones and the basic information commuters needed. Professional PIOs know how to asess the situation and provide crucial information to the public. That can be done and needs to be done in a frequent and timely manner early on in an event.
Go listen to what Sgt. David Schlosser did early on in the Holocaust shooting. He calmly and quickly told the public this is what we know and this is what we don't know. The mayor and other officials can still have their press conference but the public shouldn't have to wait for the basics when there are professionals on the scene to do that job.
What if this were a terrorism event? Do we all have to wait for the mayor to show up to find out what is going on?
On some of the other issues. The mayor and the fire chief made it clear that the DC Fire & EMS Department was the lead agency from the time the incident occurred until the last body was removed the next day. Then why did the police chief, about an hour and 20 minutes into the incident, when the scene was stabilizing, clear the area of the press?
I have talked to numerous top officials in fire and EMS, the press was not in the way on the bridge. They were moved out of an area where they could see the event and not impact the first responders and at the same time be available so the fire chief and other officials could relay information to the public.
Look at is this way, not only was no information being released, but there was a concerted effort by the police department to block the news media from gathering the information themselves.
This isn't and shouldn't be about Dave Statter's ego, or Cathy Lanier's ego, or Dennis Rubin's ego, or Adrian Fenty's ego. This is about getting information to the public in a timely manner.
On top of that, when the order is given to clear the press because they don't want us shooting bodies, that means the police chief is the editor-in-chief deciding what you will see and won't see. Is that what you want?
I haven't seen the Metropolitan Police Department's general orders on dealing with the news media in quite a while. I know there are other departments in our area that make it clear that it isn't the police department's role to decide what pictures the news media can take.
Again, to my knowledge none of the TV stations here, in their local coverage, shoot uncovered bodies and use them on the air or the Internet. And most, if not all, don't even knowingly show the covered bodies.
As for showing the faces of the injured, it is a very valid discussion and one I completely understand. All I am asking is you carefully read this article, including the comments and then let me know what you think. Should all of these award winning pictures have been censored?
http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2008/12/thousand-words-behind-picture.html
(More, below)
Let's be clear the showing of faces and the information are two different issues.
My point about the information is that I have confirmed, and so has The Washington Post and other news organizations, that the PIOs were ordered not to do interviews very early in this event. This came from the mayor's press office. It is fact.
The public at that point needs information about what is going on so they can make good decisions. It involves concern about loved ones and the basic information commuters needed. Professional PIOs know how to asess the situation and provide crucial information to the public. That can be done and needs to be done in a frequent and timely manner early on in an event.
Go listen to what Sgt. David Schlosser did early on in the Holocaust shooting. He calmly and quickly told the public this is what we know and this is what we don't know. The mayor and other officials can still have their press conference but the public shouldn't have to wait for the basics when there are professionals on the scene to do that job.
What if this were a terrorism event? Do we all have to wait for the mayor to show up to find out what is going on?
On some of the other issues. The mayor and the fire chief made it clear that the DC Fire & EMS Department was the lead agency from the time the incident occurred until the last body was removed the next day. Then why did the police chief, about an hour and 20 minutes into the incident, when the scene was stabilizing, clear the area of the press?
I have talked to numerous top officials in fire and EMS, the press was not in the way on the bridge. They were moved out of an area where they could see the event and not impact the first responders and at the same time be available so the fire chief and other officials could relay information to the public.
Look at is this way, not only was no information being released, but there was a concerted effort by the police department to block the news media from gathering the information themselves.
This isn't and shouldn't be about Dave Statter's ego, or Cathy Lanier's ego, or Dennis Rubin's ego, or Adrian Fenty's ego. This is about getting information to the public in a timely manner.
On top of that, when the order is given to clear the press because they don't want us shooting bodies, that means the police chief is the editor-in-chief deciding what you will see and won't see. Is that what you want?
I haven't seen the Metropolitan Police Department's general orders on dealing with the news media in quite a while. I know there are other departments in our area that make it clear that it isn't the police department's role to decide what pictures the news media can take.
Again, to my knowledge none of the TV stations here, in their local coverage, shoot uncovered bodies and use them on the air or the Internet. And most, if not all, don't even knowingly show the covered bodies.
As for showing the faces of the injured, it is a very valid discussion and one I completely understand. All I am asking is you carefully read this article, including the comments and then let me know what you think. Should all of these award winning pictures have been censored?
http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2008/12/thousand-words-behind-picture.html
(More, below)
Part 2
As for this part of the last comment -
"The absolute disgusting mention of such words about obstructing what as happening was an absolute shameful disgrace to the Profession of Journalists. Those who think otherwise are nothing more than Sensationalist glory seekers. News mongers with no concept nor respect for Human compasion and the suffering all those innocent souls. Statter you know better than to speak in defense of this immature juvenile disgusting thing."
What actions did you see by the press during the coverage of the Metro incident where reporters fit that description. Please be specific.
As always, I appreciate your input, but I will continue to disagree. The only think I will agree on, is no, I wouldn't want that to be my loved on seen on TV or in the newspaper. But I also wouldn't want to leave it up to the government to decide what images we can or can't shoot or publish.
Statter
Post a Comment
As for this part of the last comment -
"The absolute disgusting mention of such words about obstructing what as happening was an absolute shameful disgrace to the Profession of Journalists. Those who think otherwise are nothing more than Sensationalist glory seekers. News mongers with no concept nor respect for Human compasion and the suffering all those innocent souls. Statter you know better than to speak in defense of this immature juvenile disgusting thing."
What actions did you see by the press during the coverage of the Metro incident where reporters fit that description. Please be specific.
As always, I appreciate your input, but I will continue to disagree. The only think I will agree on, is no, I wouldn't want that to be my loved on seen on TV or in the newspaper. But I also wouldn't want to leave it up to the government to decide what images we can or can't shoot or publish.
Statter
Links to this post:
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
