Thread: Is the Press Positive or Negative About Cruising?

With the Costa Concordia tragedy, there are articles everywhere about cruising. Most of the ones I've read seem to have more of a negative slant than a positive one.

For example, today in the Washington Post they had an article written by a "consumer advocate" who is not a reporter. He was obvious extremely biased and the entire story was negative. He quoted the maritime lawyer, who is nothing more than an ambulance chaser for those with cruise problems and always has nothing but negative things to say about the industry. This article infuriated me so much, I wrote a very strongly worded letter complaining about such a one-sided article.

But this does seem to be the nature of the beast in the press nowadays. They have a mindset that negative stories sell papers. So they're more interested in reporting one side of the story instead of being fair and unbiased.

One of the things I learned in my college journalism class that has stuck with me was a comment my professor made. She was talking about writing an article and told us to remember the statement, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." She said while this was Newton's theory of motion, it equally applies to responsible reporting. In other words, when writing an article, a responsible reporter will give both sides equal coverage and allow the reader to make up their own mind and the reporter will not allow their own feelings to influence the facts. It is obvious to me that a lot of these ‘reporters’ do not know the basic principles of reporting because, quite frankly, they are not reporters. They are simply writers with an agenda.

So here's your chance to speak out. What do you think? Except for trade publications, do you think the majority of reporting in newspapers and magazines lately has been negative, positive, or fair towards cruising?


Pete

In a nutshell, negative reporting, IMHO. Jerks.

I have to say negative. Seems that most of what I have read about passengers from the Concordia have been negative and maybe a line or two from those with any positive statements.

As I read else where the media sure left the story from the Carnival Splendor problem when they could not get any negative statements from the passengers. And of course the media has a hard time with positives from a very bad situation, expecially when it comes to cruises.

Negative sells. But overall, I have found the stories on the Concordia to be a mix of pro and con.

For the UK press I would say they do which ever suits them at the time, but I find the press to be generally negative about everything.

20/20 was negative the other night.

It has been negative. A young couple from Aventura, FL which is in Miami-Dade county was on their honeymoon cruise on the Concordia. He was asked if he would cruise again and he replied, "I can't wait to cruise again, I love cruising". So, there ya go press, lol.

I wholeheartedly agree about the 20/20 report the other night - nothing but negative!

And as for the Carnival Splendor, they're still reporting about passengers having to eat spam. That was never the case! Yes, the Navy provided the ship spam along with other supplies, but it was widely reported the cases were never opened and not one passenger was ever served spam. Yet here's the press still making statements about passengers eating spam.

It's like they go out of their way to find someone with something negative to say and if they find anyone who has something positive to say, they're either not interested or that interview will not make it into the paper or on the air.

Originally Posted by Cruise Planner

I wholeheartedly agree about the 20/20 report the other night - nothing but negative!

And as for the Carnival Splendor, they're still reporting about passengers having to eat spam. That was never the case! Yes, the Navy provided the ship spam along with other supplies, but it was widely reported the cases were never opened and not one passenger was ever served spam. Yet here's the press still making statements about passengers eating spam.

It's like they go out of their way to find someone with something negative to say and if they find anyone who has something positive to say, they're either not interested or that interview will not make it into the paper or on the air.

Pete, we do remember the Swine Flu epidemic of 2009 in Mexico, right?

Oh, yeah! I loved that headline in the San Diego paper with a headline that said something like, "Cruise Passenger Gets Swine Flu".

If you read just the headlines, which most people do, you are led to believe that she got the swine flu while on a cruise.

However, when you read the story, you find out she spent a few days after the cruise in San Diego where, it just so happens, there was a Swine Flu outbreak.

So the fact she was on a cruise had nothing to do with the story - she got Swine Flu in San Diego! So the headline was extremely misleading, but it caused alot of people to rethink their cruise.

Irresponsible reporting!!

There was a similar story about a group of high school kids from Boston who went to Cancun for Spring Break. Headline said something like, "Boston Kids on Spring Break in Cancun Get Swine Flu". Again, the headline was misleading. If you read the story, you find that yes, they went to Cancun. But afterwards, they spent several days sightseeing in Mexico City. There was an outbreak in Mexico City, so guess where they got the flu? Duh! But the headlines caused alot of people to cancel bookings in Cancun. Even our own son and daughter and law wanted to cancel their honeymoon there, but it was too late. So they reluctantly went and ended up having a wonderful time. They said there were alot of cancellations and alot of businesses suffered.

Turns out, not one person ever did get Swine Flu in Cancun, but the press had already done their damage and businesses down there lost millions of dollars. All due to irresponsible reporting!