Incident on Pacific Dawn

I suggest that the 'fake news' followed reports from passengers on board who didn't actually observe the incident, but thought they knew what happened. For example - the report that a 'freak wave' washed the woman overboard: that she stumbled as she approached the rail and went overboard: and that the woman was ill at bingo and went outside to throw up. This latter one would indicate it occurred on deck 7 whereas it happened on deck 14. Rumours would have flashed around the ship and people can tend to fill in the blanks in the information available.

 

I don't think we can totally blame the media. Someone on board reported these fake facts to them. If they don't print them, they are then seen as being behind in the game of reporting the news.

Took the words out of my mouth.

There are some in the media who are happy to make things up, sure. But for many they want to report and do it well, but of course need sources to base it on. And in the pressure that is not unique to the media, it is critical to get the report as soon as possible, to beat the competition, to have the latest, and so on. Plus “Chinese whispers” have always been a thing, that one person sees something, says something not quite correctly, another interprets it slightly differently, passes it on, and it changes over time. And with urgency and cutbacks those things are magnified.

If readers use their own analysis, and scepticism, they should be able to see what’s evident. Though of course many also just take things as fact once they’re written, and so the cycle goes…

If readers use their own analysis, and scepticism, they should be able to see what’s evident. Though of course many also just take things as fact once they’re written, and so the cycle goes…

On Tuesday our doctor's receptionist remarked how terrible is that the woman fell overboard from the Pacific Dawn. She knows we cruise a lot. Of course, we explained what happened. After the facts were established, the media went quiet, either out of consideration for the family or because it wasn't such a dramatic story. I hope the reason for the drop-off in news reports was the former, but I suspect it was the latter. Unfortunately, many people will be left with the original impression given in some media: that the woman was swept off the ship by a freak wave or that she over-balanced while vomiting over the side.

If readers use their own analysis, and scepticism, they should be able to see what’s evident. Though of course many also just take things as fact once they’re written, and so the cycle goes…

And yet, on this very thread when people who knew a little about cruise-ships (not me), posted that the initial facts as reported did not add up, there were posts criticising them for doubting what was reported. There was even a discussion justifying someone vomiting over the railing.

And yet the scepticism turned out to be warranted.

A quote I use regularly: I read it on the internet so it must be true.

So the lady for whatever reason decided to jump overboard - sad for all concerned.

I suggest that the 'fake news' followed reports from passengers on board who didn't actually observe the incident, but thought they knew what happened. For example - the report that a 'freak wave' washed the woman overboard: that she stumbled as she approached the rail and went overboard: and that the woman was ill at bingo and went outside to throw up. This latter one would indicate it occurred on deck 7 whereas it happened on deck 14. Rumours would have flashed around the ship and people can tend to fill in the blanks in the information available.

 

I don't think we can totally blame the media. Someone on board reported these fake facts to them. If they don't print them, they are then seen as being behind in the game of reporting the news.

I doubt most passengers would have the time of day or money to be worried about ringing up the news media to tell them what they think happened. They would be too busy enjoying what is left of their holiday, packing, drinking, eating and socialising to be worried about contacting the media. Even if someone did waste their money to make communications with the outside world it is still lousy journalism not to verify that they were in fact a first hand witness and did not hear it on the rumour mill.

I doubt most passengers would have the time of day or money to be worried about ringing up the news media to tell them what they think happened. They would be too busy enjoying what is left of their holiday, packing, drinking, eating and socialising to be worried about contacting the media. Even if someone did waste their money to make communications with the outside world it is still lousy journalism not to verify that they were in fact a first hand witness and did not hear it on the rumour mill.

I suggest that some passengers did contact the media with their version of the news. People do it to feel important. That might seem odd to the rest of us. :D If passengers hadn't contacted the media, we would not have heard about this until after the Pacific Dawn docked at Portside. Even then, the media would not have known about the incident unless passengers contacted them. P&O and the Police would not have.

I'm not here to defend the media, but what they were doing was quoting passengers on board and that is how they presented it, i.e. "Sally, who is on board, reported that ... etc".. they weren't saying that IS what happened, they were saying this is what is being reported from passengers on board.

The problem lies I think in that nobody actually bothers to wait anymore for facts. People don't even read articles these days, they just read headlines.

I started this thread but I made NO assumptions about what happened. We didn't know what happened. All I knew is that somebody went overboard. The facts of how, when, what and why always come out in time, but nobody wants to wait. That includes the media, because they all want to beat each other to the news. They really shouldn't report more than what is actually factually correct at the time, though I don't see it changing anytime soon.

But no I don't think they "lie", they're just too hasty in wanting to get a story together, and they pad it out with fillers. Every time there's a murder in a residential street, they interview the same Joe Blow who tells us "This is such a quiet neighborhood, I never would have expected this to happen here". Every. Time. It drives me batty.

Journalism has definitely gotten lazy, and no one seems to proofread at all.

Journalism has definitely gotten lazy, and no one seems to proofread at all.

Research (and editing) takes time. And while you're doing a quality job, 'the other rag' has already posted their story errors and all.

And then the mass public switch to the other one as 'they always have the news first.' And your boss chews you off because the other guy has it on their site grabbing clicks and you don't...

Research (and editing) takes time. And while you're doing a quality job, 'the other rag' has already posted their story errors and all.

 

And then the mass public switch to the other one as 'they always have the news first.' And your boss chews you off because the other guy has it on their site grabbing clicks and you don't...

Exactly. As for contacting people for a quote, I notice that when an incident occurs on Australian cruise ships, the media always contacts Mark Brimble for a comment. They regard him as an expert:D.

Exactly. As for contacting people for a quote, I notice that when an incident occurs on Australian cruise ships, the media always contacts Mark Brimble for a comment. They regard him as an expert:D.

I suspect They are even lazier than that, getting their quotes and ‘facts’ from passengers’ Facebook posts :rolleyes:

I suspect They are even lazier than that, getting their quotes and ‘facts’ from passengers’ Facebook posts :rolleyes:

I think you may be correct there.

Exactly. As for contacting people for a quote, I notice that when an incident occurs on Australian cruise ships, the media always contacts Mark Brimble for a comment. They regard him as an expert:D.

Has Brimble ever been on a cruise ?

Actually I personally don't mind the bad publicity about cruise ships. Anyone who has cruised already is unlikely to be affected and it is keeping the demand down form people possibly considering cruising. This helps keep the pricing down as well.

Actually I personally don't mind the bad publicity about cruise ships. Anyone who has cruised already is unlikely to be affected and it is keeping the demand down form people possibly considering cruising. This helps keep the pricing down as well.

There you go mate - an optimist sees a silver lining in every cloud :)

I would be interested in the repeat rate of cruisers. Some on here are addicts of course, and others frequent cruisers so this forum is not a good sample.

I see on FB many posting that they hated this, that & the other about the first cruise, so there must be quite a few who only go once. Keep posting how bad it was, and we can benefit I say ;)

It's the world we now live in, the general public, with mobile phones are feeding the media.

So there is real a "'now"' thing, somebody posts it to facebook and everybody is on it. with no back story, or explanation... just see a image and make up a story to fit. .

It is like seeing a burning house, then jumping to the conclusion, it was a bomb, the nextdoor neighbour lit it because they were having a feud, a plane crashed into it.....

or actually somebody left the pot on cooker on and went out....

Cheers Don

There you go mate - an optimist sees a silver lining in every cloud :)

 

I would be interested in the repeat rate of cruisers. Some on here are addicts of course, and others frequent cruisers so this forum is not a good sample.

 

I see on FB many posting that they hated this, that & the other about the first cruise, so there must be quite a few who only go once. Keep posting how bad it was, and we can benefit I say ;)

Exactly, those here are in the club and can benefit from the displeasure of the one-timers.

It's the world we now live in, the general public, with mobile phones are feeding the media.

 

So there is real a "'now"' thing, somebody posts it to facebook and everybody is on it. with no back story, or explanation... just see a image and make up a story to fit. .

 

It is like seeing a burning house, then jumping to the conclusion, it was a bomb, the nextdoor neighbour lit it because they were having a feud, a plane crashed into it.....

or actually somebody left the pot on cooker on and went out....

 

Cheers Don

Or the Aliens zapped it as it had a colourbond roof rather than a zincalum one.;p

The really short answer here is be very careful and sure anytime you are near rails. Always have one hand holding on and know what is going on around you.

 

Being extra careful and alert could save your life.

I was on NCL Sky last year. I was walking on deck, I did grab the railing ... and it gave. It pushed outwards under my hand. It did NOT open ... but I just happened to have grabbed the rail where there were two gates that open for disembarkation. The gates were latched ... but it did give way enough to make me jump and my heart was in my mouth.

Now the Sky is open bar and I NEVER had more than 2 glasses of wine EACH day. I was a solo cruiser ... no one in my cabin looking for me if something happened.

I'm not saying people can fall over a railing. I would ONLY have fallen in IF the gates opened, somehow.

Lucky they were latched shut.

Without getting to far into her tragic ending, you must ask why he feels he has any say on anything to do with cruising.

A crusader.:halo:

This discussion has run its course.