Appallingly slanted reporting from the Guardian -- DC plane crash

[GeneralPeter]

This article describes Trump's theory that DEI had something to do with the crash using debunking words throughout. 'Baselessly', 'without providing evidence' etc etc.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/30/trump-washington-dc-plane-crash-dei

The thing is, this isn't 'baseless'.

The FAA has said that the tower was understaffed. We don't know if that was relevant or has not. We do know that FAA recruitment cratered because of a (very well-evidenced) extremely crude attempt at DEI. There is a long-running class action lawsuit that is on public record and not made up. The test really did award points for saying you had more Ds than Cs at school, for saying science was your weakest subject, etc etc and they did then give the answers to candidates of a particular race before the test.

Sometimes things that sound like loonish right-wing conspiracy theories actually turn out to be true. If you think I must be a right-wing loon, please read this thread first (and many others out there -- this is all public record in court documents and not denied by the FAA).

x.com/tracewoodgrains/status/1752091831095939471

You would not know any of this if you read the Guardian article. Their reporter must surely know this stuff. So it's another attempt to bury with slurs an ideologically inconvenient actual truth. We've seen this before with sex-based rights, and the Guardian should stop it.

(Obligatory: I'm not a Trump fan, think he is appalling in many respects, several of them disqualifying for the presidency. But while comment is free, facts should be sacred).

@PandoraSox, it's far from perfect, but as is their MO Reuters are making a fairly decent job of straight-down-the-middle reporting:

www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-takes-aim-without-evidence-diversity-policies-over-midair-collision-2025-01-30/

@WolfFoxHare

It's a false equivalency. A better comparison would be a President who went on a rant about DEI hires in mental health services after a mass shooting. EG a rant about the President's personal bugbear that wasn't actually proven cause of the accident.

I would agree with you. Unless there had been a well-evidenced, explicitly-DEI-focused programme in mental health that had explicitly lowered standards with the stated purpose of widening recruitment and had been part-cause of a chronic staffing shortage. I'm stressing the evidenced bit here because this is all really in black and white because of court documents.

But my beef isn't specifically with DEI in this post, it's about the Guardian.

Let's say it was President Biden who went on the tirade and the cause of the problems in mental health were something stupid Trump 1 had done (fired everyone vaccinated, for example). I would want the reporting to tell me that yes, it's true Trump fired the vaccinated. Somewhere in the piece at least. I would not want the article to write Biden's remarks up with 'baseless' 'without providing evidence' etc etc etc. Especially if the 'without providing evidence' bit related to a specific fact that was provably true.

Basically, I don't want it in either ideological direction. But the Guardian just would not have reported Biden's comments in that way.

[The above is an analogy. I'm sure you get that but worth including for busy readers].

lots on X about the identity of the blackhawk
pilot.

@verysmellyjelly I think you have a profound misunderstanding of what evidence is. Anything written prior to this crash is not currently evidence until a full investigation has taken place.

I just read the FAA statement on this crash. All it says it that is happened and names the helicopter and plane. It does not speculate on causes.

Air traffic control is just that - control of air traffic. When two aircraft collide then there has been a failure of control. That failure could arise from ATC policy, from training, from poor process, from design of flight space, from how communication works between ATC and pilots, from designated space between aircraft. ATC is not just about individual operators.

A better comparison would be a President who went on a rant about DEI hires in mental health services after a mass shooting.

Or a president who went on a rant about gun control…

Not necessarily true in the slightest. There are multiple causes of aircraft collisions that have nothing to do with a failure in ATC.

It wasn't a landslide. It was a solid electoral college win but only slightly better than Biden's tally, far below Obamas.

He won 49.8% of the popular vote to Harris's 48.3%, hardly a surprising outcome for an election "too close to call".

I couldn't agree more!!! X is now an unreliable, biased right wing platform with a highly dodgy algorithm and Elon Musk popping up spreading misinformation and lies - whether you follow him or not! Really annoys me!!

Plus I agree, SO unprofessional to smear DEI staff in this way period!!!

@verysmellyjelly

I would encourage anyone with an interest to read the technical and detailed thread on PPRuNe ("AA5342 Down DCA" is the title) if you want a more thoughtful and evidence based overview. I have no affiliation with the site, it's just one of many frequented by aviation professionals. I'm sure some of the others on this thread with an interest in aviation can recommend alternatives.

Pprune is still just about the best site for this sort of stuff but you do need to take care and not assume everybody posting has the expertise and background they try to claim.

As far at least the relevant thread there has stayed on the straight and narrow, possibly down to the mods.

I haven’t read all of those outlets, but if they are doing the exact same then I disagree with that too.

Mostly I think mainstream reporting on mainstream things is usually roughly OK. But it’s possible for all mainstream media outlets to get a take wrong, and the fact it’s in multiple places doesn’t make it correct for that reason.

There is a pattern here, though. When I think of examples of this they are all where there is a specific progressive line. I don’t know what you think on trans for example, but in my view that is an example of where all mainstream outlets, for a long time, went with incredibly tendentious takes with great confidence.

This is not exclusively and inherently a problem with progressivism. In other countries I’ve lived in there are different party lines (sometimes literally). You can definitely get the right wing version. But that’s not the West now, and it’s certainly not the issue with the Guardian.

(I’m British in the UK, though have lived elsewhere a lot including in the US. Not a Republican and dislike Trump. Centrist classical liberal on most things).

As opposed to the Guardian which is now an unreliable left wing paper with columnists who pop up spreading misinformation…

Echoing this. I think two have been named but the third has not, and there are widespread rumours about this third pilot on social media. No idea if it’s fake news.

I've read the blog and the paper linked to in this thread by the OP.

I dispute your argument @GeneralPeter that DEI is to blame for changes made to air traffic recruitment which have not solved the (seemingly already existing?) recruitment gaps but made them worse.

Racism and societal discrimination are real, we have to address it. If the FAA went about it the wrong way, annoyed the training campuses and now there are staffing problems, say that. The DEI aspect is a red herring. We shouldn't avoid addressing non representative workforces just because change is hard, we should do the change better.

Therefore, "baseless" stands in my view.

You took my comment out of context, I was responding to a poster who was conflating the two things!

I think whether or not this crash was partially caused by DEI hiring regime. (whether in collapsing intakes or just letting incompetent people through), it has been a problem highlighted in the industry for years and needs to be fixed. It was an appalling measure that prioritized diversity over safety. Here’s more from the same author about the fact the FAA knew that the new procedures would reduce their effectiveness and comprise safety but they went forward anyway.

This is a really important conversation to have: x.com/tracewoodgrains/status/1754214194835075089?s=46&t=LHu5hEVEgoG4lIIfMesJGA

Trump is deranged and cannot control his bigotry, he revels in the notoriety it brings. Anyone expecting anything better from him and his disciples is also deranged. Hurrah for the Guardian.

This is the full press conference in which Trump talks - it is worth watching the whole thing. I really think it puts the Guardian to shame to be honest.

it's a huge scandal and apparently anyone who questions it is a right wing, bigoted "they walk
among us" reform voting, racist, transphobic nazi.

I agree with all but the left wing bit - it isn't left wing anymore - not the "left wing" which is intellectually probling, supporting of real people policies, certainly - Tony Benn would be furious!

Who were non US citizens who died in the crash?

I dont mean anything by "no evidence", it's what the Times say - I've put it in italics because it's a quote 🙄

However great that you apparently do have evidence and can state these things categorically, within 24 hours of the incident. Well done. The idea of keeping an open mind until all the evidence has been reviewed is well and truly dead, in an age where Internet commentators can jump to conclusions and land the blame wherever their biases are.

An earlier thread includes a lot of speculation that the crash was "deliberate", how come you're not incensed that the media isn't reporting that?

@GeneralPeter all accounts I read say the tower instructed the helicopter to pass behind. The audio online suggests the same. The helicopter did not follow the instructions. The tower cannot force them to follow instructions. I suspect the investigation will rightly focus on that, as well as the fact Reagan regularly has helicopters fly in the same airspace as commercial flights. Everyone needs to wait for the NTSB report in 30 days.

@UniversalTruth
That’s fine. I think that’s a surprising judgment based on the material, but I believe we’re both in good faith here.

I continue to believe that the Guardian’s reporting is one-sided. Particularly egregious was the “without providing evidence” health warning attached to Trump’s claim that the FAA (strictly speaking, the transportation secretary) was being sued on this issue. The reporter must surely have known that was just, factually, provably, true. If they really didn’t check before writing, that’s really really shoddy too.

I agree racism is real and bad, and that tackling it in hiring is legitimate. The Guardian made it sound like Trump had made up this entire FAA DEI criticism out of thin air, not that it’s a long-running, well-documented legal case with actual primary sources available showing a deliberately rigged test. If the Guardian’s position is that it’s unclear whether or to what extent this is relevant, then say that. Explain the issue and let readers make up their own minds. Run a comment piece being a rude as you like about Trump, but don’t skew the news.

So USA Air traffic control Is encouraging incompetence and increasing the danger of aviation accidents? Of course it is, what civilised country with a huge part of the global aviation market wouldnt want that? And who wouldn't want the,president of the country announcing that unevidenced allegation? Only in the USA.