In reply to moffatross:
> I wasn't questioning that at all, and I said as much myself in my reply to snowdave. But I thought the MRT's scathing quote for the press including the words 'reckless', 'irresponsible' and 'ridiculous', was inappropriate under the circumstances.
Well it sounds like you think this "scathing" quote was conclusive. I'm not saying it isn't but you know that the papers or the media will twist things around and may say any old crap in order to sell papers.The MRT surely should be a more reliable source of information than the papers as you know they were up there and there is nothing in it for them to not tell the truth. The papers just need a sensationalist story.There is nothing in it for them if you are dead or alive- if anything you are better off dead for them- to be cold and calculating about it.
I know from experience that I was in the papers, and my guess is someone contacted the papers in an attempt to smear me.They were not contacted by the media- but the informant shallwe say is my guess...The reason I say that is because it happened in the sticks where nothing happens in a small ragmag and they may exaggerate be hyperbloic with the truth ,take your comments out of context or lie/exaggerate to spin an interesting yarn or two.. I only found out because an old mate in TkkMaxx said he saw me in the papers. I was like 'What!!!?" Also this is a wetdream for journalists as they do not need to investigate their story- no work involved!! They are relying on someone else to report it hearsay third-hand..At this point their objectivity is compromised.My trust in papers certainly went down after this in that respect..And it made me question all media more but I am no dummy/fool anyway.
I know there are sometimes protocols between the police and the emergency services and the media for releasing information that may still be under investigation.Say it might be a sensitive trial where they do no wish to say sway the jury or spoil proper and fair judicial process or a death whose causes are still not conclusively reported or "officially" verified- i.e reported as such So you must consider all the motives of the people involved in said incident.What is in it for them? Is it to bump themselves up or make their job easier or a bit both? The type of people that read the Daily Mail don't have a head for complexity and journalists know that.They want the knee-jerk reaction. They want to see someone's mugshot because that sells- a criminal that maybe looks like a criminal etc.- human drama, inuendo, the juice, sensationalism.
> I'm not going to dig up muck but we will all be aware of recent rescues involving well equipped and experienced groups (let's just say people like us) that made errors of judgement, and had happy outcomes, but no criticisms made and certainly no scathing words for the press. And contrary to snowdave's supposition that people venturing up mountains in shorts and trainers is a new phenomenon spurred on by FB and social media attention seeking, on my first trek up Ben Nevis about 30 years ago in the Easter holidays I saw several Bermuda short and t-shirt dressed folk on the summit (now that's a proper sign of the times :-P ) and several much better dressed dogs.
I think people have always gone up say Ben Nevis in jeans and a t-shirt or shorts without much else, in particular much experience.But I think in today's world of social media competition,GoPRO's on your helmet,irresponsible videos of u-tubes daredevils dangling on cranes, selfie-sticks, media competition for ego that characterises FB then any publicity is good publicity.
You can even get paid for it if you're good enough and live to tell the tale long enough to get noticed.
I am reminded of that one of the guy,loner type in London docklands (his mum can't watch) who walks along cranes.
Either you wanna live or you're a sucker for publicity or both or an adrenaline junkie which this guy is certainly at least :-
-BTW I am Scottish but I have only been up Ben Nevis twice I think;once I rescued 3 women on the descent which I got no thanks for whatsoever.(Although the OP privately congratulated me in all her humility saying I earned untold karma points- THANKS personally from me!!)
It is a catch-22 situation. Even the best of intentions where you wish to genuinely trace the identity of your rescuers and thank them personally from your heart can back-fire attracting the most unwelcome of publicity.I'd call it a (unwelcome or not entirely welcome) victim of your own publicity- for good or bad.
I think we seem to have a trio of -climbers/hill-walkers- experienced and less experienced alike, MRT and the media.And this forum for all purposes seems to be serving one role of intelligence and information central command.
We all want a juicy story of heroism,bravery and moral fortitude against all the odds. And sometimes we even like or enjoy ( might get-off) sharing one.
Post edited at 01:27