Is it me, or does the current coverage of the Heathrow "crisis" serve to prove that when it comes to rolling news, big news is defined by how quickly News 24 and Sky News can get camera crews there?
Yes, thousands of people have been affected. Dozens of flights have been cancelled. But does this not happen every day at an airport Heathrow's size? If the same happened when Manchester Airport completes its refurbishment, would we have a similar number of national journalists providing live feeds at check-in gates?
Certainly, its embarrassing for British Airways. Because of the destinations they fly to and the prices they charge, they tend to attract a richer customer. In the case of foreign (non British) BA travellers, that increases the likelihood they speak very good English. Which makes them ideal journalistic prey.
But no matter how hard the Beeb and Sky try, they aren't going to convince most of us that these people delayed by flights are "victims". Some had to sleep in the terminal overnight! Shock! Better bedding down for the night in a brand new airport terminal than getting ferried across to Speke sports centre for the night, as happened when Liverpool Airport was shut down during last year's terrorist alerts.
And what has been the longest delay? A day? Two? These flights were short-haul flights in the main. How much national coverage did the Liverpool-bound passengers stranded at JFK in New York for five-days as ultra-budget airline Flyglobespan tried to repair its knackered old plane? Nothing. Five days. New York. Grim hotels in the middle of nowhere. Ferried back and forth every day only to be told the plane was delayed again, and then that when it would fly, delayed passengers would have to wait until spaces came up.
Compare that to the shocking fact the BA was only offering £100 a day compensation to cover hotel room costs - apparently you can't get hotels for less than £250 in Heathrow, although I know plenty at the other end of the Heathrow Express for less than £100 - and I think I've proved my point.
If it's London, it's news. If it's out in the sticks, it's just tough luck.
Certainly, its embarrassing for British Airways. Because of the destinations they fly to and the prices they charge, they tend to attract a richer customer. In the case of foreign (non British) BA travellers, that increases the likelihood they speak very good English. Which makes them ideal journalistic prey.
But no matter how hard the Beeb and Sky try, they aren't going to convince most of us that these people delayed by flights are "victims". Some had to sleep in the terminal overnight! Shock! Better bedding down for the night in a brand new airport terminal than getting ferried across to Speke sports centre for the night, as happened when Liverpool Airport was shut down during last year's terrorist alerts.
And what has been the longest delay? A day? Two? These flights were short-haul flights in the main. How much national coverage did the Liverpool-bound passengers stranded at JFK in New York for five-days as ultra-budget airline Flyglobespan tried to repair its knackered old plane? Nothing. Five days. New York. Grim hotels in the middle of nowhere. Ferried back and forth every day only to be told the plane was delayed again, and then that when it would fly, delayed passengers would have to wait until spaces came up.
Compare that to the shocking fact the BA was only offering £100 a day compensation to cover hotel room costs - apparently you can't get hotels for less than £250 in Heathrow, although I know plenty at the other end of the Heathrow Express for less than £100 - and I think I've proved my point.
If it's London, it's news. If it's out in the sticks, it's just tough luck.
- Post to:
del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
Nowpublic
Reddit
« Previous | Home | Next »