Todos
← Back to Squawk list
United boots blogger from flight for taking photo, making 'terrorist' comment
A man says United Airlines kicked him off his flight to Istanbul on Valentine's Day after he took a picture of his seat and made a comment about terrorists. “I take photos on every single flight I am on,” Matthew Klint, a 26-year old travel blogger, told NBC News. “I have a picture of every airline meal I've been served for the last nine years.” (www.nbcnews.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Who else would carry this story NBC,cnbc,g.e. all the Obama networks. They prolly feel that one of there own was ejected.
Paul Young wrote: "... All the FA had to do was say to the Captain, "I'm not comfortable with this passenger on the airplane and that would have been it, and obviously was. End of discussion. "
Nicholas Piszczek wrote: "... Unfortunately,.I agree with every word above. "
Paul: I disagree with your contention. Simply because an FA "isn't comfortable" with a passenger doesn't mean that the Captain automatically has to eject that passenger. What if the passenger happened to be, say, her ex boyfriend or a teacher who'd flunked her in high school? Suppose two passengers were discussing a news article that said Major Hassan is a terrorist and she head only the word "terrorist".
The passenger in question made an innocent enough comment. She overreacted to it and that's why this thread exists.
Evidently you both would prefer that this sort of nonsense continues. You'd apparently rather argue and bitch about what happened than fix the problem -- so that it goes away forever.
The reason I call it nonsense is because THERE IS NO UNIFORM POLICY regarding photography of and on airplanes, trains, busses, buildings, etc.
I proposed one in my earlier posting in this thread (currently 2 days ago). Here is an excerpt from my proposal:
"The question of whether one can or cannot legally take pictures inside an airplane has become a BFD. So why don't the airlines do some thing POSITIVE about it and establish a uniform policy and carry it out with consistency? If taking pictures is permissible add a statement to the pre-flight safety briefing saying so. If it's not, say that instead.
That way EVERYBODY -- passengers, FA's, Captains, TSA, FAA, unions, you name it -- would be reading from the same page."
P.S. I forgot to include the ignorant media. Mea Culpa.
Nicholas Piszczek wrote: "... Unfortunately,.I agree with every word above. "
Paul: I disagree with your contention. Simply because an FA "isn't comfortable" with a passenger doesn't mean that the Captain automatically has to eject that passenger. What if the passenger happened to be, say, her ex boyfriend or a teacher who'd flunked her in high school? Suppose two passengers were discussing a news article that said Major Hassan is a terrorist and she head only the word "terrorist".
The passenger in question made an innocent enough comment. She overreacted to it and that's why this thread exists.
Evidently you both would prefer that this sort of nonsense continues. You'd apparently rather argue and bitch about what happened than fix the problem -- so that it goes away forever.
The reason I call it nonsense is because THERE IS NO UNIFORM POLICY regarding photography of and on airplanes, trains, busses, buildings, etc.
I proposed one in my earlier posting in this thread (currently 2 days ago). Here is an excerpt from my proposal:
"The question of whether one can or cannot legally take pictures inside an airplane has become a BFD. So why don't the airlines do some thing POSITIVE about it and establish a uniform policy and carry it out with consistency? If taking pictures is permissible add a statement to the pre-flight safety briefing saying so. If it's not, say that instead.
That way EVERYBODY -- passengers, FA's, Captains, TSA, FAA, unions, you name it -- would be reading from the same page."
P.S. I forgot to include the ignorant media. Mea Culpa.
You quote me, and then just chuck it in the bin..."Evidently you both would prefer that this sort of nonsense continues.",, then further more accuse Paul and I of a "bitch" and "argue" method in dealing with a problem that you unequivocally seem to have licked and by golly., nobody will listen to you..... Why don't you adopt a Uniform policy of reading what was said in specific and how it pertains too not getting kicked off an aircraft first and then state your case to management with the nonsense photography issue after that. Its either you really believe that fuzz or I am a fool for responding to devils advocate careerists.
I will repeat:
When having a unsatisfactory relationship with an FA, the T-word helps NO-ONE,.No- body, No-How..Ever. IT renders anything else you want to inject post facto for your own personal condition meaningless.
I will repeat:
When having a unsatisfactory relationship with an FA, the T-word helps NO-ONE,.No- body, No-How..Ever. IT renders anything else you want to inject post facto for your own personal condition meaningless.
Nicholas, inasmuch as the comment I quoted expressed your complete agreement with what Paul had said, I thought you might understand that you, too, were being addressed. Alas, I was wrong.
Read what I said to Paul in response to his explanation. It should be self explanatory. It reiterated what was said in my initial posting on this issue.
You should heed your own advice and read what was said in specific about how to avoid incidents like this. I made a simple suggestion as to what I think the airlines should do. You obviously either didn't read it or decided to ignore it.
What "fuzz"? Where's the "fuzz" in:
"No photography of any kind is permitted aboard this airplane" IF that were the airlines' uniform policy.
"Devils advocate careerist". Me? No way. I'm a career problem solver. To solve a problem it's necessary to identify what the problem is, not just its symptoms. In this case the problem is there's a world-wide Tower of Babel on the question of what's permitted vis a vis photography. Imagine what international air control would be like if English weren't its common language. A similar agreement on photography would solve the problem in question.
Have a nice day ;-)
Read what I said to Paul in response to his explanation. It should be self explanatory. It reiterated what was said in my initial posting on this issue.
You should heed your own advice and read what was said in specific about how to avoid incidents like this. I made a simple suggestion as to what I think the airlines should do. You obviously either didn't read it or decided to ignore it.
What "fuzz"? Where's the "fuzz" in:
"No photography of any kind is permitted aboard this airplane" IF that were the airlines' uniform policy.
"Devils advocate careerist". Me? No way. I'm a career problem solver. To solve a problem it's necessary to identify what the problem is, not just its symptoms. In this case the problem is there's a world-wide Tower of Babel on the question of what's permitted vis a vis photography. Imagine what international air control would be like if English weren't its common language. A similar agreement on photography would solve the problem in question.
Have a nice day ;-)
Thanks.
My comment about the FA speaking to the Captain about not being comfortable with a particular passenger onboard and that being the end of it was not intended to be taken literally. Maybe I should have included quote marks around the words "that would have been it,...End of discussion." I didn't feel it necessary to write a movie script dialogue. I'll grant that you can come up with all sorts of goofy scenarios to discredit my terse conclusion. Obviously the Captain has to insert his judgement into the situation and make a decision as to disposition of a passenger which included in this case dialoguing with the "offending" passenger. The Captain is also under company pressure to keep a schedule so he doesn't have all day to hold court and coddle a passenger's personal concerns and complaints. He also has to weigh carefully the input of a member of his crew, whose input should until proven otherwise be deemed of greater credibility than that of the passenger.
Without having been present we can only speculate as to the precise nature and content of the exchanges between the passenger, the FA and the Captain, but the company has entrusted this Captain with the power to render final judgement as to whether to transport a given passenger balancing the safety of the remaining passengers and crew against the concerns/complaints of one passenger. He can't go to the back of airplane and take a poll among the passengers as if it were a democratic society rendering judgement on whether to seat or expel a given passenger from their midst. He need not and should not consult a higher authority. No doubt some of those decisions will inevitably err on the side of being overly conservative
Captains always dread to see the senior FA approaching the cockpit prior to push back with a concerned on her/his face. I don't envy any commercial Captain the decision making tasks with which they are faced in today's stressful transportation environment. We're all imperfect beings and by no means infallible. We do make mistakes despite all the training, education and experience. Been there done that!
Without having been present we can only speculate as to the precise nature and content of the exchanges between the passenger, the FA and the Captain, but the company has entrusted this Captain with the power to render final judgement as to whether to transport a given passenger balancing the safety of the remaining passengers and crew against the concerns/complaints of one passenger. He can't go to the back of airplane and take a poll among the passengers as if it were a democratic society rendering judgement on whether to seat or expel a given passenger from their midst. He need not and should not consult a higher authority. No doubt some of those decisions will inevitably err on the side of being overly conservative
Captains always dread to see the senior FA approaching the cockpit prior to push back with a concerned on her/his face. I don't envy any commercial Captain the decision making tasks with which they are faced in today's stressful transportation environment. We're all imperfect beings and by no means infallible. We do make mistakes despite all the training, education and experience. Been there done that!
Paul: I don't have any disagreement with your explanation. I understand the Captain's authority and responsibility. It's his airplane and he can pretty much do as his best judgment dictates.
Nevertheless, what you have said debates the details of the incident, but it doesn't address the bigger issue -- namely that NOBODY seems to know exactly where they stand on the issue of photography in and around airplanes, airports , etc. It's fine if United has a policy in its manuals, but its like the Obamacare bill that was passed -- NOBODY who's going to have to live with it knew what was in it.
In the pre flight safety briefings we're told that "smoking is not permitted" so if you smoke, or try to, you're in violation of something that you knew or should've known and you're in trouble.
When you attempt to take a picture because there's nothing you know of that prevents you from doing so, and then you're told not to by a FA because she says so, that certainly could evoke a "why not?" It wasn't smart of the perp to include the word "terrorist" in his response, however innocently he intended it.
What I've suggested is that the airlines come up with a common policy regarding the taking of pictures, videos, etc., and unequivocally let their passengers know it. Then issues like the one in question won't happen, but should they occur the policy being violated is known to everyone concerned -- and the consequences would require very little judgment.
Btw, I understand a Captain's role very well. I had my own command in the Navy. Once I said "I relieve you, sir" to my predecessor, it was all mine -- the authority and the responsibility. It was up to me to exercise both in the best way I could to carry out our mission.
Nevertheless, what you have said debates the details of the incident, but it doesn't address the bigger issue -- namely that NOBODY seems to know exactly where they stand on the issue of photography in and around airplanes, airports , etc. It's fine if United has a policy in its manuals, but its like the Obamacare bill that was passed -- NOBODY who's going to have to live with it knew what was in it.
In the pre flight safety briefings we're told that "smoking is not permitted" so if you smoke, or try to, you're in violation of something that you knew or should've known and you're in trouble.
When you attempt to take a picture because there's nothing you know of that prevents you from doing so, and then you're told not to by a FA because she says so, that certainly could evoke a "why not?" It wasn't smart of the perp to include the word "terrorist" in his response, however innocently he intended it.
What I've suggested is that the airlines come up with a common policy regarding the taking of pictures, videos, etc., and unequivocally let their passengers know it. Then issues like the one in question won't happen, but should they occur the policy being violated is known to everyone concerned -- and the consequences would require very little judgment.
Btw, I understand a Captain's role very well. I had my own command in the Navy. Once I said "I relieve you, sir" to my predecessor, it was all mine -- the authority and the responsibility. It was up to me to exercise both in the best way I could to carry out our mission.
KISS. Take pics if you want. If crew tells you you it's against policy then stop. KISS.