Tuesday, November 03, 2015

Western's news outlets purposely demonize Russia's aviation industry

  • If the airplane in question is from a Russian manufacturer [Tupolev, Ilyushin, Yakovlev, Irkut, Sukhoi, etc.], then irrespective of the nationality of the airline, the title of the news story will emphasize the terms "Russian jet crashes...", "Russian plane crashes...", "Russian airliner crashes...", "Russian airplane crashes...", etc.
  • If the airline in question is Russian, then irrespective of the nationality of the actual airplane, the title of the news story again will emphasize the terms "Russian jet crashes...", "Russian plane crashes...", "Russian airliner crashes...", "Russian airplane crashes...", etc.
The latter was most evident this week with the crash of Kogalymavia Flight 9268, operated by an Airbus A321. Every Western media outlet rushed to demonize Russia's aviation sector by emphasizing that the plane that crashed was Russian, when in fact it was not. It was a plane crash of a Russian airline, and the equipment that crashed was European.

Whenever there is any Russian connection in a plane crash, Western media's dogs quickly and loudly start barking "Russia! Russia! Russia!" in order to make the world feel like something Russian has crashed, even when the real truth might be otherwise. Russian airlines and Russian aircraft manufacturers are not given names. They're simply referred to as Russian. This is one of the hundreds of ways in which they demonize Russia.

Update [2-May-19]: Just came across this 2015 NYT story on Russia's Aeroflot starting to induct Russian-made passenger airliners. Not unexpected that NYT tries to paint Russian aircraft in a negative light with sentences such as "As Aeroflot folds Russian-made jets back into its fleet, cramped doorways are just one of its challenges.". NYT apparently deliberately didn't compare the size of doors on the Superjet 100 with its competitors/peers [by Embraer, Mitsubishi, Antonov and Bombardier], thus giving an incomplete and distorted message about both Superjet and Aeroflot to its readers. Appears fully intentional and malicious rather than accidental.

Another gem in the NYT story:

"Judging by passenger chatter, the squat, chubby Superjet is not many travelers’ first choice for getting around. “An idiotic plane,” one customer wrote on Aeroflot’s website after taking a flight on the Superjet. “For me, all routes this tub flies are off limits. Once was enough.”"

How did NYT find out the average value of the "passenger chatter", so as to be able to write the average/summary - "...is not many travelers’ first choice for getting around..."? It looks like NYT handpicked the negative comments/reviews in order to present Superjet in a negative light.

Yet another NYT gem:

"The Superjet itself has had safety problems. During a demonstration flight in 2012, the plane crashed into a mountain in Indonesia with 37 aviation executives and journalists and eight crew members aboard, killing everybody. Aeroflot says the plane these days is safe."

No mention that the crash was a result of pilot error, and not the plane itself. Obscene attempt to make readers fear Superjet.

Update [26-May-19]: A fresh, latest example of Western news media berating Russian aviation industry [likely to cause commercial damage]. One crash [probably the first with revenue passengers] of the Sukhoi Superjet and the FT starts to spew dark and grim analyses about the entire Russian aviation industry [notwithstanding the fact that "Great" Britain, with its centuries of worldwide colonialism / imperialism accompanied by unfathomable loot of others' wealth conducted across the globe doesn't have a civil aircraft industry at all - this despite it not having been subjected to a traumatic experience of the scale of the breakup of the Soviet Union, that Russia endured and came out from]. The FT pretends that Boeings and Airbuses don't crash, when it throws in completely unwarranted exaggerations such as "one of the drive’s greatest failures". The FT says "has failed to find serious buyers other than the Kremlin’s own Aeroflot, due to manufacturing and repair concerns.", but doesn't even touch the possibility of the role of malicious geopolitics in Russian aircraft getting few orders. The role of Western sanctions in negative affecting Russia's aircraft industry is not directly noted.

No comments:

Post a Comment