the front page of the toronto sun had a quote, 'our tsunami' with a big picture of some poor woman clinging to something in the water.
uhhh... yeah because the storm struck with no warning what-so-ever and the death toll is approaching 30,000 people. are these people retarded?

the plane crash in toronto was called a miracle by a lot of media outlets. although everyone survived, it was no miracle. if the plane dropped from 35,000' into a farmers feild in rural saskatchewan and everyone survived it could be considered a miracle. the plane in toronto skidded off the runway as it was making a normal landing (in heavy weather mind you but nothing was abnormal otherwise).

the media sucks!!!!

You gotta remember Evad, a 50 ton weight flying at the earth at speeds of over 100 MPH with huge gas tanks on it is going to explode probably as theres bound to be sparks at the very least, and if not sparks then the force of the imact would cause something to hit and explode so it would be a miracle even if it was just landing.

50 tons? I think that covers their FEUL.

But it's not really so much a miracle...I doubt it was going more than 50 mph or so, if that. I know that's still fast, but it's a lot better, and trust me, they don't build airplanes so they explode at the slightest impact :p

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]50 tons? I think that covers their FEUL.

But it's not really so much a miracle...I doubt it was going more than 50 mph or so, if that. I know that's still fast, but it's a lot better, and trust me, they don't build airplanes so they explode at the slightest impact :p[/QUOTE]


Actually, many of the heavier planes make landings (And takeoffs) in the 100mph range. Only small 1 engine prop planes take off at 60mph.

And not that it matters. There was an instance where the blowout of a tire on an airplane managed to cause an engine to explode into flames and destroy the aircraft. (Concord, anyone?)

In the news media, there is an unofficial comment about what stories are the most important: "If it bleeds, it leads."

More importantly, every news organization wants to tell you the same thing that the others tell you, so they don't have straight examples of when their coverage was lacking. In a "perfect" media, you'd have sites like Engadget and the like, where they "only" cover gadget related news. That would be *gasp* the 500 channels would all be...um...specialized!

More than half of everything media does is designed to keep viewers and make money. The Simpsons is only on for this season, despite the severe drop in quality, because the viewership is still there, and the advertisers can bank on it.

Here in North Texas, and being from around the Houston area, I saw lots of coverage on our local news (where they sent entire teams of 7-10 reporters down to report 5 miles from each other...) about the Hurricane, and from the CNN coverage, it's been hugely effecting to me to see all the damage.

That plane "crash" was overdubbed a miracle. John Stewart pointed it out. You obviously watched it. But the amount of people who've survived this is a miracle too. That's what the news "should" be saying, but, hey, what would you show about this miracle? Not a still standing plane.

"If it bleeds, it leads."