The Honest Truth

Crapdog

Advanced
Jan 24, 2004
135
17
Article :shock:

Airlines tangle the media in their web of deception

You and I wake up most mornings of our working lives and head to an airport knowing there's a good chance we're about to be lied to by whatever airline we happen to be flying that particular day.
Airlines lie about their schedules: I called Air India one afternoon during a howling East Coast snowstorm to inquire about its 9 p.m. departure to Paris. Despite the rapidly deteriorating weather, the voice on the other end of the phone insisted that the flight would leave on time. It actually departed after midnight.

Airlines lie about their fares: A British court on Wednesday ruled Ryanair misled customers by promoting fares without mentioning that the prices did not include taxes. The ever-pugnacious folks at Ryanair insisted that the repeated promotional gaffes were merely accidents.

Airlines lie about their service: I recently helped a friend book an itinerary to Hawaii. Continental insists Flight 49 from Newark to Maui is a direct, one-stop flight which usually means no change of aircraft. But Flight 49 actually requires that you fly a Boeing 757 to its Houston/Intercontinental hub, disembark, walk the entire distance of the U-shaped Terminal E, then board a Boeing 767 that is also called Flight 49. This particular airline lie even has a name: a "change of gauge" flight.

Airlines lie about everything, in fact. The salaries of their executives. Their tax burden. Their frequent-flier programs. Their rules. And even their names. After all, code-sharing is nothing if it is not putting one airline's name on a flight that is actually operated by another carrier.

But what I want to discuss today is this: If you and I know that the airlines lie why don't my compatriots in the mainstream media know this?

I refer, of course, to last week's report from the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation. He concluded that the inept management of US Airways was to blame for the Christmas-holiday meltdown that inconvenienced more than 500,000 travelers and caused about 400 flight cancellations, 3,900 flight delays and 70,000 lost bags.

If the IG's analysis comes as a surprise to you, it's probably because you were watching or reading about the debacle during the holiday, when the general media were devoting round-the-clock attention to the situation until the Asian tsunami put everything into perspective. Day after day, US Airways spokespeople stepped up to the microphones and claimed the problems were caused by an unexpected spike in sick calls from employees. They hinted darkly at an illegal job action. And US Airways chief executive officer Bruce Lakefield — who coined the term "operational meltdown" — blamed the fiasco on the "irresponsible actions of a few."

The reporters who served up these assertions from US Airways as gospel truth never once questioned the airline's claims. US Airways spokespeople presented phony numbers — deftly juxtaposing an average day's worth of sick calls with the always-higher holiday rate — as proof of their claims. Few reporters demanded clarification, even though US Airways' public-relations types have a proven track record of unreliability. The media ran with Lakefield's canned comments and never mentioned that neither he nor chairman David Bronner were interviewed. They never mentioned that neither was even on the scene at US Airways during the holidays. And the media waited days before reporting the counterclaims of US Airways' labor unions that the airline's line employees were not engaged in a sick-out and were not absent in unexpected numbers.

As you can read in the IG's report, every assertion that US Airways made was a fabrication or a preventable error. The IG places the entire blame on US Airways management for bad planning, sloppiness and penury. And it shows that US Airways employees were neither absent in extraordinary numbers nor engaged in a job action over Christmas.

It was all a fog of lies and incompetence on the part of US Airways management — and the media covering the story over Christmas blithely and credulously waded into the fog.

If this were a one-time failing on the part of my mass-media comrades, I'd be more forgiving. After all, I know better than most the pressure that my colleagues are under. I helped trained a number of the people on the front line of business journalism today.

But the Christmas event was not an exception. It was the rule. Airlines have been lying to the mass media for years. And the media keeps getting fooled in crisis after crisis.

These are, after all, the very same media people who continue to report Richard Branson says he'll launch Virgin America this year — without reminding you that he's been saying the same thing since at least 1999 or mentioning that Branson has no money, no planes, no routes and no government approval to fly.

These are the same people who report to you that United chief executive Glenn Tilton says he'll be buying other airlines after United exits bankruptcy later this year. But they report his comments without mentioning that United is more than two years into Chapter 11 and hasn't even presented a plan of reorganization to the court or that Tilton has a documented trail of delusional overstatement and outright falsehood about everything that has happened at United since he took over late in 2002.

These are the same media types who lionized Gordon Bethune when he left Continental at the end of last year without mentioning that he was consistently wrong about everything that has occurred at Continental in specific and the airline business in general after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Nor did they bother to mention that Continental's new management filed a report with the Securities and Exchange Commission just days after Bethune officially departed and admitted that the airline was a financial basket case.

I can explain in excruciating detail a lot of the reasons why my media colleagues have lost the battle of self-evident truth with the airlines. Some reasons are cultural: We still live in a society where it's OK to say "the company offers but unions demand." Some are institutional: Most mass-media outlets are owned by huge conglomerates whose corporate goals are profits, not truth. And some are structural: It is nearly impossible for classically trained American business journalists to cope with an industry that is fundamentally dysfunctional, largely bankrupt and historically incoherent.

But some of the reasons are simply attitudinal. The underpaid, overworked men and women who write your daily newspapers, business magazines and television and radio programs assume that the airlines are telling the truth until proven otherwise.

Not me. As a business traveler as well as a business journalist, I know better. Like you, I assume the airlines are lying until they can prove otherwise.

A little more of a business traveler's incredulity on the part of my mass-media colleagues would go a long, long way in cutting through the fog.

Read previous columns

Joe Brancatelli is editor and publisher of JoeSentMe.com, a Web site for business travelers. He is also the former executive editor of Frequent Flyer magazine, travel advisor of Travel Holiday and contributing editor to Travel + Leisure. He can be reached at [email protected].
 
hear you loud and clear but what exactly do you think they'd tell you otherwise???
'our planes are delayed by 3 hours if you have any sense you will cancel your flight and really muck it up tomorrow..... '
 
aerosmith said:
But what I want to discuss today is this: If you and I know that the airlines lie why don't my compatriots in the mainstream media know this?
Answer: Republican controlled media outlets! :down:
[post="253552"][/post]​
only fox is conservative and not republican controlled....however you and your minions howl like hell when they report anything counter to the die hard dem boosheet from cbs,abc,nbc....
republican controlled...dude this makes me laugh.....
case in point if you weren't aware...rathers assasination of bush via some bogart prepped up horse crap story over bush's military service that cost dan his job.... or didn't you notice??
if the dems are so in control why then did so many elect 'w'???
you must be aware also that for 'w' to be elected by so big a margin many many of your brethren had to have crossed party lines....
why you ask??
your party has lost direction...your party doesn't represent the true voice of the people anymore.....
look at it disintegrating before your very eyes.....
how'd daschele get bounced out?? people are tired of hearing the sameold scare the old people boosheet....every election.....
it hasn't worked last election nor will it down the road...you need a new message other than scaring old folks outa their social security and medicare...
bush says he wants to do something to correct s/s and suddenly dems say its not a problem.... hahaha...its the truth...w takes the wind outa their sails.....
he wants to fix all the issues dems be campaining on for the last 20 years and now there is no problem??
lies,deciet and trickery...the democrat way.... ;)
so apparently in your little world only fox reported this story then??? ;)
700 you're on deck...
 
delldude said:
....
case in point if you weren't aware...rathers assasination of bush via some bogart prepped up horse crap story over bush's military service that cost dan his job.... or didn't you notice??

Agreed, major foot in mouth.

delldude said:
if the dems are so in control why then did so many elect 'w'???
you must be aware also that for 'w' to be elected by so big a margin many many of your brethren had to have crossed party lines....

Not to start a political flame, but when does 50.73% become "so big a margin"? For that matter, I don't think it counts as a "mandate" either.

The media is in a bit of a rough spot. They ask the questions of the companies involved, and get an answer directly “from the horses mouthâ€￾. Colleagues and Joe-public when new information comes out at a later date to disprove their earlier information bastardize them. Unless you are sitting behind the CFO or have a whistle-blower on your payroll, you have to go with what you know (or in this case were told). I do agree with Mr. Brancatelli with the point that I wish airlines would be more up front with their information. You can say this about any business however. The airlines however do seem to do this out of habit. Playing the cards close to your chest days are over, and the sooner they realize that the sooner they will earn customer respect again.
 
case in point if you weren't aware...rathers assasination of bush via some bogart prepped up horse crap story over bush's military service that cost dan his job.... or didn't you notice??
The documents were bullshit, but not the story. The story wasnt even based on the documents and was already done before they even showed up.

your party has lost direction...your party doesn't represent the true voice of the people anymore.....
look at it disintegrating before your very eyes.....
Then why did more people vote Democrate than in any other election in history?

it hasn't worked last election nor will it down the road...you need a new message other than scaring old folks outa their social security and medicare...
bush says he wants to do something to correct s/s and suddenly dems say its not a problem.... hahaha...its the truth...w takes the wind outa their sails.....
the dems were only half right, its not old folks he is gonna screw, its me. His private accounts bullshit is just a shell game, it fixes nothing.
he wants to fix all the issues dems be campaining on for the last 20 years and now there is no problem??
He wants to cut your benefits. Enjoy your retirment.

lies,deciet and trickery...the democrat way....

More likey the American way, at least as afar as politics is concerned.

Bush lied when he saide he wouldnt spend the Social Security surplus, and then did. What do you call that? a lie, a deciet, or trickery?

Tha facts are that both parties conspired to screw social security in the 80's to feed thier own selfish needs. The dems got a tax hike by rasing the Social Security rate and Reagan could save face cause technicaly it wasnt a tax hike( His cuts were way too deep and the government realy needed the money). And it also shifted the tax burden onto the middle and lower classes, cause the Social Security tax is regressive. Thanks guys.
 
Bush lied when he saide he wouldnt spend the Social Security surplus, and then did. What do you call that? a lie, a deciet, or trickery?
i guess he's the first one to do it?
don't you mean projected??and didn't billy dip way into it before 'w'? ;)
 
they ALL diped. They also did not all promise they wouldnt. No, I dont mean projected, its rigged to always have a surplus. My point wasnt weather he should have spent it, it was that he lied about it. Just cause he isnt the first makes it ok for you? I though Bush was supposed to lead by example or morals or values or god or something. Geuss he is just shilling for votes like the next person.
 
I though I explained why its full of IOU's, The money was spent to subsidize a few very expensive tax cuts. Social Security takes in way more money than it currently needs, and our goverment takes the surplus and spends it. I guess you could call it kiting, but when its done by the people who make the rules, it probably isnt illigal.
 
I think more in terms of a corporate, as opposed to political, media.

A reporter at NBC is not going far by flipping overs rocks at GE to see what comes slithering out.

Plus, it's human nature to go with the flow, and trend towards the easy way out. Easier to accept the corporate breast-feeding than to actually think for one's self.

And it could be the old fogey in me, but most schools have quit teaching skills that lead to critical thinking; they are too busy boosting self-esteem in the little darlings, even though there is no concomitant accomplishment.

One would have thought that when U made the initial slander, at least ONE reporter would have wondered, "is U spinning, or truthtelling?" It would have been simple to dig a bit deeper; the truth was close to the surface.It speaks volumes that the whole of the media went unquestioningly with the spin, and piled onto labor.

Why would they go with the flow, when it would have been sooooo easy to have 'gotcha'd' U?

Because it played into the larger agenda of dismantling labor.
 
PineyBob said:
The last few posts have exactly what to do with US Airways and/or commercial aviation?
[post="253592"][/post]​

Is that kinda like what the health topic of Pineybob had to do with USAirways? Let me guess.. since you are a customer the employees of usairways need to know what is happening in your personal life. They need to compare the great Pineybob's health insurance to there own. Ahh thats it nevermind the topic wasn't titled lets compare health plans. I love the hypocrisy you ooze.
 
PineyBob said:
The last few posts have exactly what to do with US Airways and/or commercial aviation?
[post="253592"][/post]​

I was wondering that myself. I think the original topic was to point out that airlines and USAir in particular have lost their credibility and I would hope in the future anything sent out by the gang at CCY is met with skepticism.

BTW: more people did vote Democratic in the last election but unfortunately even more voted Republican
 
PineyBob said:
The last few posts have exactly what to do with US Airways and/or commercial aviation?
[post="253592"][/post]​
About the same as all your Xerox comments do....
 
To the "political" discussion of who lied, who lied first, who lied biggest...

About 125 years ago, Mark Twain said, "Suppose you had a politician. Now, suppose he was a crook. Ah, but I repeat myself." Can anyone say that the situation has changed appreciably? :lol:

To the original discussion...

A lot of the media today is controlled by conservative elements beside Fox. Charter Communications--major supporters of the GOP-- of San Antonio owns over 1100 radio stations nationwide including ALL the stations in some markets. Belo Corporation--also Bush supporters--owns a number of newspapers and TV stations in major markets. In Dallas they own not only the Dallas Morning News--our only newspaper now--but also the ABC affiliate station for the entire DFW metro area.

The issue for TV stations and newspapers today is selling advertising--sales of the the newspaper or production of the TV show itself in no way pays the bills. I once asked the restaurant critic for the Houston Chronicle if she was ever tempted to write something like, "This restaurant's food should be condemned by the health department on taste alone." She said, "Of course. The thought occurs more often than you would think, but the paper will not allow me to write something like that because it hurts advertising sales."

Unions do not buy ad space on a regular basis. The airlines do. Therefore, the airlines must be the ones telling the real story.


(No. There's not a cynical bone in my body. Why ever would you even ask? :lol: )