tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post3071905049609070711..comments2024-01-25T19:59:19.744-05:00Comments on COPA Flight 8 Ottawa: YOW Volunteer Airport Watcher FiredMichael Shawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17881160865679740901noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-56746284608044243762012-08-16T09:56:44.432-04:002012-08-16T09:56:44.432-04:00How stupid can it be... I'm a pilot, and sure,...How stupid can it be... I'm a pilot, and sure, if involved in an incident, I know the only 3 persons I will speak too, NTSB, airport owner and airplane owner...<br /><br />If I'm a bystander I can talk and say what ever I want... to the NTSB to do it's job! Like for a traffic accident, or anything else... what's wrong with this country now too much influence from the US... lucky us that we still have the right to listen to any radio frequencies (including air traffics)...<br /><br />And it's a volunteer job!!! I now hope that Stephanie will continue do the same but this time being PAID by some local news agency just to report what ever she wants... Free country it is...?<br />SFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-57198259222290791672010-07-13T12:26:38.987-04:002010-07-13T12:26:38.987-04:00When you are a member of an organisation and are i...When you are a member of an organisation and are identified as being a member, when you speak you are speaking for that organisation. I am a member of two volunteer organisations related to aviation and both have people who's job it is to deal with the press, but they also have different rules for members. In one case the organisation is dedicated to the preservation and display of historically significant aircraft, and members are encouraged to discuss these with the public. There are however clear areas where only specific people should be venture in terms of discussion.<br />The other organisation is part of the SAR operations in Canada and therefore deals with some very sensitive issues and members are trained how to deal with the press. The key part of that training is how to tell the reported who the correct person to talk to is, and for the member not to discuss anything about the ongoing incident. The rules are clear and the consequences are the same as those experienced by Ms. Nicholds.<br />When you sign up with an organisation whether as a volunteer or an employee you accept limitations on your actions and your speech based on the interests of that organisation, and it's rules. If you completely free speech don't be part of anything that you can be identified with.Terrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-87489846381606309612010-06-23T19:56:22.843-04:002010-06-23T19:56:22.843-04:00David: You bring up a good point it is an offence ...David: You bring up a good point it is an offence to communicate what you have heard on the radio. The appropriate part is in the <a href="http://www.laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/R-2/page-4.html#anchorbo-ga:s_9" rel="nofollow">Radiocommunication Act (R.S., 1985, c. R-2)</a> and the exceptions are in the <a href="http://www.laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-96-484/page-5.html#anchorbo-ga:l_VII" rel="nofollow">Regs</a>, but they don't apply here.<br /><br />It says: <br /><br />"Prohibition<br /><br />(1.1) Except as prescribed, no person shall make use of or divulge a radio-based telephone communication<br />(a) if the originator of the communication or the person intended by the originator of the communication to receive it was in Canada when the communication was made; and<br />(b) unless the originator, or the person intended by the originator to receive the communication consents to the use or divulgence."<br /><br />As you can tell my main concern was her conclusion that it was hydroplaning. It might have been, but there are many other explanations that would account for the accident, too, at least as CBC reported it. It could have been a brake failure, or a long and fast landing or a thrust reverser failure or many other things. I always think it is best to leave accident investigation to the accident investigators.<br /><br />On the other hand the airport authority seemed upset that she had talked to the media at all, but then they are probably afraid of comments that could lead the airport authority to being sued for the accident.Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-38786517109694974812010-06-23T16:51:19.195-04:002010-06-23T16:51:19.195-04:00Ruth: reporters have a right to ask anyone anythin...Ruth: reporters have a right to ask anyone anything that want (as long as the question itself doesn't violate hate laws, etc.). Ms. Nicholds is a responsible adult (responsible enough to be an airport watcher) so it's her obligation to know and follow the rules of her organization, no matter what questions people ask. She gave interviews to several news organizations, including the Citizen, CBC, and (I think) another TV network, so she was hardly drawn out reluctantly.<br /><br />Adam: was it right to kick her out? Hard call. One thing no one mentioned is that she repeated information she heard over the radio, which (at least in 2002, when I got my restricted radio operators license) was illegal in Canada. That said, it's a law that everyone breaks, including airline pilots and air traffic controllers who blog and web sites that stream ATC feeds, so I'm happy they didn't go after her for it.davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15194758376900990105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-38084779081564795642010-06-23T14:14:28.759-04:002010-06-23T14:14:28.759-04:00It is always wise to think before speaking which M...It is always wise to think before speaking which Ms. Nicholds seems to have neglected doing. She could have indicated clearly that her remarks are her own opinion only and that she is no expert on the subject.<br />Conversely, I think the reporter bears at least some responsibility for asking a witness to report on what happened - rather than on what he or she saw. <br />Words not only define concepts but inform opinion and influence subsequent action.<br />Ms. Nicholds was wrong in stating what she saw as though it were incontrovertible truth. However, the reporter was also wrong to extract some kind of comment from someone who is clearly <b><i>not</i></b> an expert.Ruth personhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03876220888758034975noreply@blogger.com