What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Trouble at Boston Marathon?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

A friend was 200 yards from the explosion. Said he ordered a beer and the entire place shook. Said he's in a state of shock.
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

MavHockey14 said:
A friend was 200 yards from the explosion. Said he ordered a beer and the entire place shook. Said he's in a state of shock.
Click to expand...
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's not drag beer's good name through the mud in our quest to get to the bottom of this.
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

Significant police presence at Brigham and women's.... WCVB is acting very restrained (which I appreciate).
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

Police are not answering if specific people are being guarded by police
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

Keeping air traffic going is a good thing, close to normal as possible I guess
 
In Springfield. No announcement yet although a police officer just walked past me. Guess we are heading to Boston...
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

dxmnkd316 said:
I've read that the JFK Library incident was a fire and not any sort of explosion... Lots of contradictory reports flying around.
Click to expand...
Just confirmed fire, not explosion, no fatalities or injuries. Everyone accounted for. There had been some electrical problems earlier.
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

I have done Boston, NYC, and Monteal a number of times.

I'm sadden by this and now we have to be more vigilant in events like this. I was thinking of doing one more marathon in my life and now I have more to think about. My thoughts and prayers to the injured and killed. I was in Dunkin Donuts when some lady in front of me talked about body parts and had no idea what happened or what she was talking about. ((
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

dxmnkd316 said:
Pictures on CBS's broadcast show a boy about that age who looks to be fine save for a few superficial injuries.
Click to expand...


According to CNN, Boston Children's Hosp had 9 injured brought in, 8 of them children and 1 the mother of one of the children.


:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
 
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

Priceless said:
Nothing, but I'm guessing that won't stop the talking heads from speculating.
Click to expand...

No it won't. One of the unavoidable aspects of going "wall to wall" is the necessity to fill up all that time, live. And the usual standards for vetting the credibility of the people you put on the air can be compromised, badly. The pressure to get somebody on the air, with even the most tenuous connection to the event, overwhelms the standards that would normally obtain.

What that continuous coverage amounts to is "editing on the air." They pass along whatever information is available, including speculation by people who have an agenda, and only later begin to weed out the bad information and baseless speculation.

Most of you are too young to remember the network chaos after Reagan got shot. As you may recall, press secretary Jim Brady was grievously wounded. The late Frank Reynolds reported on ABC that Brady had died. And the network put up video of WH staffers crying, presumably in reaction to Brady's death. As it turned out, they were reacting to Reynolds' incorrect report. An obviously angry Reynolds in a very loud voice said on the air "we need to get this right."
 
Last edited:
Re: Trouble at Boston Marathon?

Old Pio said:
No it won't. One of the unavoidable aspects of going "wall to wall" is the necessity to fill up all that time, live. And the usual standards for vetting the credibility of the people you put on the air can be compromised, badly. The pressure to get somebody on the air, with even the most tenuous connection to the event, overwhelms the standards that would normally obtain.

What that continuous coverage amounts to is "editing on the air." They pass along whatever information is available, including speculation by people who have an agenda, and only later begin to weed out the bad information and baseless speculation.

Most of you are too young to remember the network chaos after Reagan got shot. As you may recall, press secretary Jim Brady was grievously wounded. The late Frank Reynolds reported on ABC that Brady had died. And the network put up video of WH staffers crying, presumably in reaction to Brady's death. As it turned out, they were reacting to Reynolds' incorrect report. An obviously angry Reynolds in a very loud voice said on the air "we need to get this right."
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a professor from my alma mater saying "I'd rather be last and right than first and wrong."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top