Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!lll-crg!seismo!hao!woods
From: woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods)
Newsgroups: net.space,net.columbia
Subject: Re: Television coverage
Message-ID: <1940@hao.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Feb-86 15:11:54 EST
Article-I.D.: hao.1940
Posted: Wed Feb  5 15:11:54 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Feb-86 21:50:34 EST
References: <11627@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <15019@rochester.UUCP>
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 15
Xref: watmath net.space:5632 net.columbia:2128

> You are forgetting one thing.  It was the callous news networks that were
> responsible for showing the crowd's bemoaning the loss of the shuttle over and
> over and over and over ......, not NASA.  At first it was news and then it was
> a money maker for the networks.  This is just another case of irresponsible
> journalism exercised so ofter by the American news media.  I am ashamed of them.

  I hate to tell you this, but we are just as bad as the media. It is no
coincidence that there are 50 times more articles in net.columbia since
the disaster than there were before. (One or two a day previously based on
nearly a hundred per day since the fatal morning). The media only deliver what 
the people want to see. Based on number of contributions, we are certainly
a lot more interested in discussing the shuttle program now that we've
had a disaster. Why should the media be expected to be any different?

--Greg