[chrysostom]

http://bit.ly/Qn92m

Completely lost : Not new but eerie!

Blatantly on an island somewhere, chech the manisfest for a bald man in a wheelchair, and a fat millionaire...

[Munki Bhoy]

Ahh, but Gordon Brown has said he fears there may be British types on the plane. Oh no, that clearly makes it far more important now. 200+ Frenchies could be dead, but God forbid there should be a Brit in there.

I * hate that attitude.

[English Bob]

Ahh, but Gordon Brown has said he fears there may be British types on the plane. Oh no, that clearly makes it far more important now. 200+ Frenchies could be dead, but God forbid there should be a Brit in there.

I * hate that attitude.

Amen to that. Whenever theres a major incident these days, the news focuses on the number of Brits caught up in it. Selfish 'patriotic' garbage.

[TIAL]

To quote Scroobius Pip:

"Thou shalt give equal worth to tragedies that occur in non-english speaking countries as to those that occur in english speaking countries."

I love that track.

[English Bob]

He spoke alot of truth did Mr Pip.

[DannyBoy]

If theres any aviation enthusiasts correct me here but I thought a plane crashing or crash landing onto water is better than land, seems really strange they are saying NO ONE ON BOARD has survived, they haven't found flight recorder etc, what about Captain Chesley Sullenberger who landed that bad boy onto the Hudson River in January.

[Console]

If theres any aviation enthusiasts correct me here but I thought a plane crashing or crash landing onto water is better than land

Landing on water is no better than landing on land - actually, there are numerous common (well, common for crashing planes) circumstances where landing on water would actually be worse.

[Ed Pummelon]

I'd guess it depends on whether you have the chance to try and land the thing under some kind of power, or if it just drops out of the sky.

[Console]

Either way your are better off trying to land on the land - largely, but not solely, due to the fact that you won't drown on land.

[chrysostom]

Or landing on a mysterious island...

[MK Chris]

If theres any aviation enthusiasts correct me here but I thought a plane crashing or crash landing onto water is better than land, seems really strange they are saying NO ONE ON BOARD has survived, they haven't found flight recorder etc, what about Captain Chesley Sullenberger who landed that bad boy onto the Hudson River in January.

Yeah, but that was a unique incident and in the highly, highly unlikely event that it would happen again (let alone again in the same year), surely it'd be easy to spot the plane.

[Yudster]

Ahh, but Gordon Brown has said he fears there may be British types on the plane. Oh no, that clearly makes it far more important now. 200+ Frenchies could be dead, but God forbid there should be a Brit in there.

I * hate that attitude.

Amen to that. Whenever theres a major incident these days, the news focuses on the number of Brits caught up in it. Selfish 'patriotic' garbage.

I didn't hear what Brown said but I think the reason that accidents are reported in this way is because its going to be relevant to people - maybe only a few, maybe many - in this country that there are British casualties in an incident. If someone I knew had been in Rio and I knew they were planning to fly to Paris, I would want to know if there were British passengers on that plane. It wouldn't confirm anything, but it would be one of the first pieces of information I needed.

[Johnny 1989]

Ahh, but Gordon Brown has said he fears there may be British types on the plane. Oh no, that clearly makes it far more important now. 200+ Frenchies could be dead, but God forbid there should be a Brit in there.

I * hate that attitude.

Amen to that. Whenever theres a major incident these days, the news focuses on the number of Brits caught up in it. Selfish 'patriotic' garbage.

I didn't hear what Brown said but I think the reason that accidents are reported in this way is because its going to be relevant to people - maybe only a few, maybe many - in this country that there are British casualties in an incident. If someone I knew had been in Rio and I knew they were planning to fly to Paris, I would want to know if there were British passengers on that plane. It wouldn't confirm anything, but it would be one of the first pieces of information I needed.

I'm with you on this Yudster, I understand where Munki Bhoy & English Bob are coming from but if I had friends or family on their way or returning from holiday & it happens to be to/from the place they were on holiday I'd like to know if they were involved in it or not as soon as possible.

[Yudster]

I know there does seem to be more fuss made about incidents where British people are involved, but we are in Britain - its relevant information rather than some kind of sick nationalistic obsession. I hope!

[Johnny 1989]

I know there does seem to be more fuss made about incidents where British people are involved, but we are in Britain - its relevant information rather than some kind of sick nationalistic obsession. I hope!

I'd imagine if there was an x amount of, say, Australian Passengers involved in a similar incident (hopefully we don't get another incident for some considerable time) then they would probably make a "fuss" (I can't think of a better word at the mo) as well

[Ed Pummelon]

I know there does seem to be more fuss made about incidents where British people are involved, but we are in Britain - its relevant information rather than some kind of sick nationalistic obsession. I hope!

Depends who's writing it...

[Munki Bhoy]

Brits being involved should make no difference whatsoever. If you know people that are making that flight you'd do your best to find out if they were involved whether they said there were Brits on board or not. The fact that there's 1, 5, or the whole plane load that at Brits makes no change to whether it could be someone you know or not.

We're all human beings, we should all be just as concerned and bothered no matter who is involved. Just because a lot of humans don't think like that is no excuse to play to their relative disillusionment. And yet again it comes down to power. The power of the media, and certainly the power of the leader of the country! They should be setting a good example, and in this case they're not.

So basically, you're wrong and the news shouldn't be wrong too because everyone else is.

[Yudster]

Brits being involved should make no difference whatsoever. If you know people that are making that flight you'd do your best to find out if they were involved whether they said there were Brits on board or not. The fact that there's 1, 5, or the whole plane load that at Brits makes no change to whether it could be someone you know or not.

We're all human beings, we should all be just as concerned and bothered no matter who is involved. Just because a lot of humans don't think like that is no excuse to play to their relative disillusionment. And yet again it comes down to power. The power of the media, and certainly the power of the leader of the country! They should be setting a good example, and in this case they're not.

So basically, you're wrong and the news shouldn't be wrong too because everyone else is.

But the news is right - they are reporting what has happened. As we are in Britain, then it makes perfect sense to put more emphasis on news which is relevant to Britain and British people. Are you suggesting that if there were no British people involved the crash wouldn't have been reported at all? Of course it would. The fact that there were British people on board is a fact, and it is specifically reported here because it is relevant here.

When there are disasters such as crashes, earthquakes and floods in other countries, which have nothing whatsoever to do with anyone British, it is thoroughly reported and the PM usually makes a comment (in exactly the same way as he did here), and sometimes even the royals have their say. If this didn't happen you might have a point - but it does, and you don't. Well you possibly do, but I have a feeling that it is part of a different agenda.

[jocky85]

It did strike a not with me reading that Brazil has declared 3 days of national mourning for those lost. Britain doesn't do anything like that!

[jocky85]

*note

[MK Chris]

What good, really, would three days of national mourning do though? Fair enough you look sympathetic as a country, but would it help find the plane?

[Yudster]

It did strike a not with me reading that Brazil has declared 3 days of national mourning for those lost. Britain doesn't do anything like that!

That's a cultural (and partly religious) difference though. We have no tradition of official mourning in this country any more, and even when we did it was a far more private and personal thing, not the big enforced public show of grief, which realistically can't possibly be anything but feigned for the vast majority of people.

[Latina]

I agree with Yudster. Everyone knows that British people are no more important than any other nationality, but the British media have to report on any British casualties for a pretty obvious reason. It perturbs me when people jump to conclusions about scary patriotism in such cases.

Wouldn't you expect any other country to do the same? It's common sense.

[MK Chris]

Everyone knows that British people are no more important than any other nationality

Not everyone, unfortunately.

[Latina]

Everyone knows that British people are no more important than any other nationality

Not everyone, unfortunately.

Okay fair enough (sorry for the bad wording), but you must know what I'm getting at.