Discussion in 'Politics' started by inandlong, Feb 1, 2003.
May God Bless Their Souls...
I wonder how much of the increased revenue Fox News, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, and CNN as a result of this tragedy is going to be donated to the families of those who lost their lives today?
We get angry at the windfall profits of the oil companies when they benefit from tragedies that produce spikes in the price of oil, but do we get as angry when the ratings numbers come out showing increased viewership of TV news who benefit from the increased advertising revenues from increased viewship?
Do the advertisers on all of these programs, who also generate some of their windfall profits as a result from disasters like this, as people watch more of the TV news and their ads get a bigger audience and repetitive showings of ads (a proven formula to get people to buy products), and are made to suffer through more advertising than they would normally?
I am disgusted with the way the media covers events like this in general, and how they benefit from these tragedies financially without donating at least a portion of those windfall profits to the families of the victims.
Optional, I've seen you make some great posts in the past, but your assesment of media profiting off this disaster is dead wrong.
I've had Fox News on for the past 4 hours, and they have not taken a single commercial break. If you recall, the 9/11 massarce caused massive revenue losses to the media outlets, as they never pause for commercial break during such major news events.
I've heard there are some 800+ fail-safe parts on a shuttle; the failure of any one could result in a catastrophe. This isn't true of a plane.
I also once gave flying lessons to a guy who worked for NASA.
He said the "safety tolerance" built into a plane is maybe 1.5 to 2 rimes the "book" figures. He said on the shuttle it's more like 1.1.
Ok, 4 hours no commercials....maybe 6 hours....then what?
Specials on the crash, repeated showing of the film clips, special programming....
Bottom line, it TV news is a business, not a public service, and they do indeed profit as a result from tragedy, just as newspapers benefitted before TV as a result of tragedy through increased circulation.
Just imagine how much good will either CBS, CNBC, FOX, etc. or their advertisers could generate with announcing a "fund for the families of the victims" funded by windfall profits.
Look at the numbers following 9/11 for the news channels, the circulation numbers for Time magazine, etc, and other increase in attention to the media by Joe Sixpack.
If they profit from someone elses tragedy, shouldn't they give something back?
My impression is that print media does profit off this sort of event, while TV news networks lose money.
I also recall newscorp taking a huge charge for Q3 2001, as a direct result of lost advertising revenue. Their ratings skyrocketed, but they weren't running commercials.
The simple objectivist answer? NO.
I'm sure Jesse Jackson, Flava Flav and Ralph Nader would disagree.
"Fail-safe" generally means that if a component fails, it will not fail in such a way as to cause catastrophe. I don't know where you heard it, but either you didn't understand what they said or they didn't understand what they said.
As an engineer who has done much hazards analysis for gas plants, compressor stations, etc., I can assure you that NASA has done extensive failure analysis and scenario planning - with multiple failures necessary before most catastrophes result. Nevertheless, flying a space shuttle in and out of space is a highly risky endeavor. In addition, nobody could or would design a space shuttle that would have zero risk of accident - it's not possible (and even if it was probably wouldn't be done due to weight and other design considerations).
The path to human progress is always built on failure and what we learn from it. Those who would propose drastic changes to the US space program as a result of the accident never have and never will understand risk and risk management. What if the SEC said "Oh my gosh, a daytrader has lost his life's savings! We've got to stop investing/trading via the stock markets!!" - it's sounds ridiculous because it is. Life is fraught with risk - NASA knew the risks, the astronauts knew the risks, and we should be generally aware of the risks.
My level of respect for astronauts is high and increased once again today - somebody above made a stupid reference to "What's the difference b/w an astronaut and an airline pilot" - it's RISK!!!
My thoughts and prayers are with the families, with NASA, with our government, and with our country!!
Very sad. Problems could occur as long as 6 minutes in west California before the final breakup in Texas. Cannot imagine the mental and physical suffering in these minutes for the crew members.
Kirsten Larson Headquarters, Washington, DC February 22, 2001 (Phone: 202/358-0243) James Hartsfield Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX (Phone: 281/483-5111) RELEASE: 01-25 ON THE EVE OF ITS 20th ANNIVERSARY, AMERICA'S FIRST SPACE SHUTTLE RETURNS TO SERVICE BETTER THAN EVER On the eve of the 20th anniversary of its maiden voyage, America's first space shuttle orbiter, Columbia, returns to service this week fresh from a year and a half of maintenance and upgrades that have made it better than ever. "Columbia is a safer shuttle today than the day it first launched," said Astronaut John Young, who commanded the first-ever space shuttle mission aboard Columbia in April 1981. "Columbia has gotten better as it has gotten older. It's gone from test flights to doing things we once never dreamed we could do. Although space flight will always carry risks, we must keep pace with advances in technology and improve the shuttle when we can, ensuring it is as safe as it can be." This weekend, Columbia is scheduled to be carried piggyback atop the NASA 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft from the Boeing shuttle facility in Palmdale, CA, to the Kennedy Space Center, FL, to begin preparations for its 27th trip to space. "As its 20th birthday approaches, Columbia is fit to fly for many more years," Space Shuttle Program Manager Ron Dittemore said. "It is safer and more capable than it has ever been, a result of the thorough maintenance and continuous improvements that have been incorporated regularly into the shuttle fleet." More than 100 modifications and improvements have been made to Columbia, highlighted by the installation of a new "glass cockpit" that replaced mechanical instruments with 11 full- color, flat-panel displays. The new cockpit is lighter, uses less electricity and sets the stage for the next generation of improvements, a "smart cockpit" under development that will make the cockpit even more user-friendly. Columbia is the second of NASA's four space shuttles to be fitted with the new "glass cockpit." Columbia spent a year and a half at the Palmdale facility. Other improvements include weight reductions that have increased the amount of cargo Columbia can carry to orbit by hundreds of pounds. To save weight, almost 1,000 pounds of unused wire -- left over from equipment and sensors that were used on Columbia for only the first few space shuttle test flights -- were removed. Because of wiring damage found in the shuttle fleet in 1999, comprehensive inspections of 95 percent of Columbia's more than 200 miles of wire were performed at Palmdale. To prevent such damage from recurring, technicians smoothed rough edges throughout the shuttle and encased wiring in high-traffic work areas in protective tubing. Such inspections and protective measures will be a regular feature of all future shuttle major maintenance. Preliminary preparations were made that could allow Columbia to use a space station docking system, enabling it to join the rest of the shuttle fleet as a future courier to the International Space Station if needed. In addition, Columbia's crew cabin floor was strengthened, the heat protection on its wings was enhanced and protection from space debris was added to its cooling system, making it a safer spacecraft. While Columbia was in California, technicians scoured the shuttle during months of intensive structural inspections, using the latest technology to check for even minute signs of fatigue, corrosion or broken rivets or welds. Upon arrival at Kennedy, Columbia will begin preparations for its next trip into space, scheduled for this fall
Guess I meant failure critical or something similar. Bad choice of words
Separate names with a comma.