Translations
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
I will say this about reporters... You can choose to NOT get involved with reporters and they will call all of the area dz's and talk to dzos and joe skydiver(s) and get all kinds of misinformation and then turn around and write something about BASE jumping anyway - all without having talked to the people who REALLY know about what's going on with base jumping. Sometimes they will give up and move on in the absence of info, but I'd be particularly careful about the ones who are dead-set on writing a story. If you work with them carefully then you can manage to salvage something that otherwise might go horribly awry.
If you culture a relationship with them that goes beyond question/answer(question-dodging)... and really give them a peek into how and why and what some of the background is... then maybe the reporter will see your side and work to avoid revealing the critically sensitive bits in favor of protecting you and your cohorts.
I'll give you an example to support my claim. There was a journalist in our area who wanted to do a story on BASE and by the time he talked to us (base jumpers) he had already talked to a half-dozen dzos and joe skydiver types... he already had the skinny on some of the objects we were doing (or that had been done in the past)... and he had a really good grasp on the background of the sport. HE WAS GOING TO WRITE A STORY, DAMMIT. When he finally talked to us, though, there were a lot of gross errors in what others (non base) had told him... as well is some sensitive object information that needed protection.
So what I'm saying is this... a journalist who does his/her homework (in the sense that he or she has ferreted out some information from various sources that are not necessarily BASE-related but which give some insight into the sport) can be dangerous if left unattended. Admittedly, this journalist would not let us see the final draft (though he did read several rough drafts to me over the phone - and we worked 'together' on some of the language), so I was nervous about how it would finally read. But by the time it was all over, he left happy and educated with a neat assignment in his feather cap and we came away with a neat article that was not a smear nor a bust. In fact, it was a pretty damn-good article if you discount a few small errors that anyone not involved in the sport would never notice.
I would REALLY HATE to have read what might have been printed had we not gotten involved. I don't know whether it is better to just remain silent and do nothing... or to work to correct misinformation that might otherwise be published. It is obviously a very fine line and YMMV depending on your political skills and the journalist. I only got involved after I heard some of the crap he had gotten from the dzo/joe skydiver-types... and my reluctance to talk was quite evident to the journalist; nevertheless, we developed a pretty good relationship after it was all said and done.
Finally, I have to point out something else: these articles don't get the kind of attention that you might think they do. Most people don't care one bit and will never even read the article. The sport is not going to be under a GREAT BIG SPOTLIGHT just because some news ferret wrote an article... it will be more akin to a pen light (maybe) or a match flame. While our sport is great and wonderful to us... it's just another sport to most - and 'most' don't care one way or the other.
Just some thoughts those of you currently under media pressure to come off with the 411.
Gardner
