Excellent posting Ninurta and I have to agree with you in regards of the original account 'morphing'
due to the media's need to sell their story.
I worked in the newspaper business for nearly thirty years and even from my limited amount of access
to how reporting is done, I'm aware of how polishing stories to create a certain slant for readers is often
done in the name of acquiring and maintaining a good level of that readership.
Television journalism resides in an entirely different kingdom, it juggles with the glittering orbs of ratings
and entertainment. These two vital ingredients are needed to succeed for one simple formula:
Excitement means lots of viewers, lots of viewers means larger advertising potential, advertising pays
the salaries, salary means I eat tonight!
Many times, facts are omitted due to limited space and time, a Sub-Editor's perspective of how a story
should be seen by the medium's assumed readers and in a worryingly far-too many cases, slip-shod
journalism.
The realities of the media trade constantly struggling for the sake of readership and ratings in this world
of twenty-four-hour news, has changed into a forum where a true account of an incident can -within only a
few hours, become a totally different animal!
I would like to add that this type of behavior isn't a recent phenomena, if one investigates the 1906 San
Francisco earthquake, one will discover that the news medias of that time were implicit in the alteration
of photographs and reports.
And I know that I witnessed at least two such 'changes' in my time in the business.
By the way and not wishing to wander from the story, some time ago I took a hit from a member of
'The Site Which Will Remain Nameless' in which it was stated I wasn't a journalist and had no right to say
the things I said.
I was and am not, but there are other areas of the newspaper business that work alongside journalism and
at times, are heavily involved in assisting reports into 'coming to life'
If it's seen that non-journalistic folk such as myself may have diluted the trade in the name of saving money,
then there lies a possible answer to why today's reports may not have the disciplines that we assume were
around in days of yore.
But I digress.
................................
In this particular case of Mike Herdman's disappearance, it's obvious that most media-outlets used the
same original source and as the search continued, the story lost it's initial 'juice' as an eye-catcher.
It's not uncommon today, for some -if not most employees of media companies to occasionally copy and
paste a story from somewhere else, add some 'fact-based' spice and call it done.
This in most cases happens as long as the website the story orginated from has at least some form
of journalistic respect, but sometimes is not necessarily a prerequisite.
So... you've-go-what-you've-got and you get on with it.
......................................
A few Posers.
'...Around 9:30 PM, under a full moon, Duke ran from camp, and Herdman, barefoot and dressed only
in board shorts and a t-shirt set out after his canine companion. Byars joined Herdman in search of the
dog...'
(From this thread)
There's no mention of a bag being taken with them as they struck out after the dog.
'...Earlier in the day at Del Flats, the family dog Duke was located in “Okay shape; dehydrated
and thinner, but appeared not injured,” according to spokesperson Beth Stogner.
Hikers initially found him and alerted authorities and that’s when Bridget Herdman, Mike Hardman’s
wife, was escorted to the site where the dog had been seen. Duke, recognizing Bridget immediately,
ran to her waiting arms...'
SOURCE:
'...On Tuesday, they found ‘Herdman’s “backpack and some footprints indicating his southerly
direction of travel along the creek...'
(From this thread)
If the dog was close to the water and assuming there's areas that an animal can reach the water,
then why would Duke be dehydrated? I would have thought that it's instinctive for an animal to
quench it's thirst and especially when it's close to water.
(I'm not a camper/hiker, so I'm just thinking off the top of my head!)
But... if the dog's natural loyalty had been 'altered' and Duke's owner was no longer perceived
a friend but now a foe, would Duke risk going near the creek for a drink?
Is this too critical?
'...After a mile through the rugged Sespe River bottom, Byars & Herdman agreed to go separate
directions to cover more ground...'
'...Dean said there was no indication of foul play. The sheriff said the body was about 3/4 of a mile
from and 1,200 feet above the campsite, which was in the creek basin...'
(From this thread)
Did Mr. Herdman attempt to come back to the camp site? I have no idea of the terrain and it's effects
on people using it nor what negative effects distance combined with this terrain can have.
Can it be said that the fishermen were better equipped for this sort of countryside and if so,were the
two Arcadia (California) firefighters/EMTs trained to a lesser degree than the two fishermen?
More investigation is needed, comrades!
due to the media's need to sell their story.
I worked in the newspaper business for nearly thirty years and even from my limited amount of access
to how reporting is done, I'm aware of how polishing stories to create a certain slant for readers is often
done in the name of acquiring and maintaining a good level of that readership.
Television journalism resides in an entirely different kingdom, it juggles with the glittering orbs of ratings
and entertainment. These two vital ingredients are needed to succeed for one simple formula:
Excitement means lots of viewers, lots of viewers means larger advertising potential, advertising pays
the salaries, salary means I eat tonight!
Many times, facts are omitted due to limited space and time, a Sub-Editor's perspective of how a story
should be seen by the medium's assumed readers and in a worryingly far-too many cases, slip-shod
journalism.
The realities of the media trade constantly struggling for the sake of readership and ratings in this world
of twenty-four-hour news, has changed into a forum where a true account of an incident can -within only a
few hours, become a totally different animal!
I would like to add that this type of behavior isn't a recent phenomena, if one investigates the 1906 San
Francisco earthquake, one will discover that the news medias of that time were implicit in the alteration
of photographs and reports.
And I know that I witnessed at least two such 'changes' in my time in the business.
By the way and not wishing to wander from the story, some time ago I took a hit from a member of
'The Site Which Will Remain Nameless' in which it was stated I wasn't a journalist and had no right to say
the things I said.
I was and am not, but there are other areas of the newspaper business that work alongside journalism and
at times, are heavily involved in assisting reports into 'coming to life'
If it's seen that non-journalistic folk such as myself may have diluted the trade in the name of saving money,
then there lies a possible answer to why today's reports may not have the disciplines that we assume were
around in days of yore.
But I digress.
................................
In this particular case of Mike Herdman's disappearance, it's obvious that most media-outlets used the
same original source and as the search continued, the story lost it's initial 'juice' as an eye-catcher.
It's not uncommon today, for some -if not most employees of media companies to occasionally copy and
paste a story from somewhere else, add some 'fact-based' spice and call it done.
This in most cases happens as long as the website the story orginated from has at least some form
of journalistic respect, but sometimes is not necessarily a prerequisite.
So... you've-go-what-you've-got and you get on with it.
......................................
A few Posers.
'...Around 9:30 PM, under a full moon, Duke ran from camp, and Herdman, barefoot and dressed only
in board shorts and a t-shirt set out after his canine companion. Byars joined Herdman in search of the
dog...'
(From this thread)
There's no mention of a bag being taken with them as they struck out after the dog.
'...Earlier in the day at Del Flats, the family dog Duke was located in “Okay shape; dehydrated
and thinner, but appeared not injured,” according to spokesperson Beth Stogner.
Hikers initially found him and alerted authorities and that’s when Bridget Herdman, Mike Hardman’s
wife, was escorted to the site where the dog had been seen. Duke, recognizing Bridget immediately,
ran to her waiting arms...'
SOURCE:
'...On Tuesday, they found ‘Herdman’s “backpack and some footprints indicating his southerly
direction of travel along the creek...'
(From this thread)
If the dog was close to the water and assuming there's areas that an animal can reach the water,
then why would Duke be dehydrated? I would have thought that it's instinctive for an animal to
quench it's thirst and especially when it's close to water.
(I'm not a camper/hiker, so I'm just thinking off the top of my head!)
But... if the dog's natural loyalty had been 'altered' and Duke's owner was no longer perceived
a friend but now a foe, would Duke risk going near the creek for a drink?
Is this too critical?
'...After a mile through the rugged Sespe River bottom, Byars & Herdman agreed to go separate
directions to cover more ground...'
'...Dean said there was no indication of foul play. The sheriff said the body was about 3/4 of a mile
from and 1,200 feet above the campsite, which was in the creek basin...'
(From this thread)
Did Mr. Herdman attempt to come back to the camp site? I have no idea of the terrain and it's effects
on people using it nor what negative effects distance combined with this terrain can have.
Can it be said that the fishermen were better equipped for this sort of countryside and if so,were the
two Arcadia (California) firefighters/EMTs trained to a lesser degree than the two fishermen?
More investigation is needed, comrades!
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe.