Speculation and media beat ups - Thunder River Rapids incident

[razza1987]

Seven and nine need to stop their nonsense competing for the biggest story. Nine posts that they have the exclusive interview with this woman and then channel seven turns around and posts it as well. This is a tragedy not a competition on who can get more viewers or who can "get the scoop." Both of their channels need to grow up and realise a complete tragedy has happened instead of trying to "one up" the other channel. I don't think either 7 or 9 have enough respect and integrity to do that sadly

[Santa07]

What can you expect from the media...

[webslave]

Well, yes, what can you expect?  Their industry lives and dies on eyeballs.  If one has the exclusive interview are you going to see it?

[razza1987]

3 minutes ago, webslave said:

Well, yes, what can you expect?  Their industry lives and dies on eyeballs.  If one has the exclusive interview are you going to see it?

The ironic thing is they both pretty much claim to have the interview with her so neither of them have an exclusive anything 

[MaxxTheMonster]

A bit off topic but I guess on the topic of media...

I watched the Amanda Knox documentary on Netflix last night and one of the main people they were speaking to was one of the reporters...  A true insight to exactly how their minds work...  He said that they didn't really cover anything to do with Rudy Guede (the sole person said to be responsible) as there was more interest and sensational stories to come from the information about Amanda Knox (who was ultimately exonerated)...

I found the documentary interesting to see how the media works and has such a huge impact on the public that they don't care about the truth...  Just what will move newspapers, get people to watch their coverage, etc...

[webslave]

The only thing you need to know about (particularly current affairs) reporting you can learn from Working Dog's classic 'Frontline' program.  Truly magnificent, and every bit as true today as it was when it was made.

Example;

 

[razza1987]

13 minutes ago, MaxxTheMonster said:

A bit off topic but I guess on the topic of media...

I watched the Amanda Knox documentary on Netflix last night and one of the main people they were speaking to was one of the reporters...  A true insight to exactly how their minds work...  He said that they didn't really cover anything to do with Rudy Guede (the sole person said to be responsible) as there was more interest and sensational stories to come from the information about Amanda Knox (who was ultimately exonerated)...

I found the documentary interesting to see how the media works and has such a huge impact on the public that they don't care about the truth...  Just what will move newspapers, get people to watch their coverage, etc...

When I think of disgusting media tactics I have just two words to show how the media destroys people even if they have to tell lies to do so:

 

Michael Jackson

 

I have never fully trusted the media when I learned the truth behind Michael and his complete innocence. The media like to destroy anyone as long as they can sell a story. It's one of the reasons I don't watch the nightly news every night 

[Richard]

I think this media witch-hunt is a bit dramatic. Their coverage of this story is exactly the same as their coverage for anything. You can't be disgusted at this and then still tune into the six o'clock news or visit their website day in day out to see them treat any issue of public interest in the same manner.

Despite some of the sensationalised aspects of the coverage, the media have by and large been accurate on many of the facts we now know to be correct. Why isn't it perfectly reasonable to ask questions of the safety or maintenance regime of this and other attractions? Why isn't it reasonable to be asking questions of the long-term viability of Dreamworld, or the appropriateness of reopening on Friday?

Let's say this was a potential design flaw in a car that led to a fatal accident. The media would be all over that manufacturer in the exact same manner and I guarantee no one here would be questioning this style of reporting like so many here are doing. Because it's a big anonymous conglomerate overseas that should be held accountable, not their beloved local theme park?

[Theme Park Girl]

Because when they can't even be respectful enough to allow peeps to lay flowers and have a private moment to mourn over the deaths of fellow park goers without them trying to get news footage of every tear and flower laid, you truly get to understand what low lives they really are. What I experienced outside of Dreamworld yesterday was appalling, I had to practically weave through endless news tents and media cameras to get anywhere near the tribute area, all whilst their reporters were all standing around on standby to do their live crosses for the afternoon news. 

Yes, I am all for questions asked and some coverage of the tragedy, but there are also times when they need to understand that enough is enough, show some respect and compassion, and back off. 

[razza1987]

They can't even get their facts right. They just said on the news that New South Wales police would be involved in the decision to whether tomorrow goes ahead. Um wouldn't that be Queensland police?

[New display name]

AWU are pulling post off their Facebook page.   They can do want they want but it would be nice if they explained themselves.   I managed to snip one before it was removed but on reflecting I might just keep it to myself.

@Richard I have not watched the news for a few years now.

Edited October 27, 2016 by YLFATEEKS

[Theme Park Girl]

I wasn't intending to share these, the only reason I took them is because I chose not to take my daughter along yesterday and she wanted to know "what Dreamworld looks like right now". 

But it demonstrates exactly how bad the media circus was around there yesterday, if not still already like that now...

You can see all the news reporters lined up to do their live crosses in the last photo, along with the bloke who insisted on filming footage every time someone put flowers down or went near the tribute. I found it all to be somewhat disturbing.

I was struggling to hold back tears when I arrived, seeing the tribute of flowers really hit home for me reality wise. But felt embarrassed to express my emotions because of all the reporters around watching, and was forcing myself not to cry. Shouldn't have to be like that ?

Edited October 27, 2016 by Theme Park Girl

[Richard]

Please don't misinterpret this as a negative comment about laying flowers or paying respects at Dreamworld @Theme Park Girl, but by the very nature of those actions it constitutes a very public, not private, moment of mourning. Sadly it comes with the territory of paying your respects at the site of an incident of national and global interest.

Nor have I @YLFATEEKS... but I get the feeling that a lot of the media-flaming is from people that gladly lap up mainstream news coverage 365 days a year. I do have my genuine concerns about the media in general; but the vibe I'm getting here is that *this time* they've gone too far. Not that they go too far in general.

[webslave]

Bang-on.  If grieving for people you did not know in private is important enough to you then you have absolute discretion to not go to the one place in the state that you can guarantee a very high concentration of media.

[Theme Park Girl]

Forgive me, this is the first time I have ever had to attend a public tribute site. It just seems a little unfair that park staff and other related industry people are given the option of attending a private ceremony at the site of the incident, yet the rest of us aren't. Instead we are forced to deal with the media circus instead

[webslave]

You're not forced to anything.  You're going there by choice.  Your only connection to these people is an interest in the manner in which they died.

Your heart is in the right place, clearly, but I'm not sure your head is right now.

[Ashley]

I think what @Theme Park Girl is trying to say if you go to pay your respects your then forced to deal with the media circus as you can't avoid it and you can't tell them to back off as it is a public area.  

 

[razza1987]

49 minutes ago, YLFATEEKS said:

AWU are pulling post off their Facebook page.   They can do want they want but it would be nice if they explained themselves.   I managed to snip one before it was removed but on reflecting I might just keep it to myself.

@Richard I have not watched the news for a few years now.

Those people should be ashamed of themselves with how much mud they have thrown Dreamworlds way the last few days. If there was really all these problems they were talking about Dreamworld would have had to have fixed them not "ignore them"

[Brad2912]

19 minutes ago, webslave said:

You're not forced to anything.  You're going there by choice.  Your only connection to these people is an interest in the manner in which they died.

Your heart is in the right place, clearly, but I'm not sure your head is right now.

No one was forced to go there, but I didn't go there as I had an interest in the manner in which they died. I went there because 4 people died whilst on holidays, leaving families torn apart, all of whom are interstate or overseas and can't place flowers themselves. I went there because DW staff need to know the community is behind them and supportive. 

[Wilkommen]

2 days later and this whole incident still seems so surreal. When details were first emerging, I thought it was an incident similar to something I experienced on the rapids in the past.

 

On 01/02/2015 at 3:18 PM, Wilkommen said:

Got stuck on the rapids once as well. Right at the end where the conveyor belt thing takes you back to the start, our raft wouldn't lock in and we were stuck at the bottom of the conveyor belt. It wasn't until the next raft came along that we got knocked onto the conveyor belt. The operators had a puzzled look on their face when they saw two rafts come up at once. I think I recorded that moment on my phone as well.

 

The ride obviously has had some minor issues but it seems at no point did anyone consider them to be potentially deadly issues.

[JeffreyMoore]

with it been very likely that the thunder river rapids ride will not reopen

does everyone think dreamworld will leave it and eureka sbno as they seem to like to do or do you think they will take the chance to remove both rides ASAP as respect to the incident

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I think, if they make the decision that it should not reopen, it would open the door for development of gold rush country.

One of the reasons previously cited for not demolishing Eureka was that it was over the ride envelope of an active ride (thunder river) - so if TRR is not to reopen, they could easily shutdown all of GRC (with a small path leading to Buzzsaw) and completely redevelop it.

I still say that this sort of talk is premature, but if it be the case... thats my thoughts.

[ashhole157]

Its going to be hard to remove TRRR unless they concrete fill the channels.

 

[JeffreyMoore]

1 minute ago, ashhole157 said:

Its going to be hard to remove TRRR unless they concrete fill the channels.

 

im sure they would remove the whole ride - concrete channels

im sure this incident will also kill any plans to refurbish eureka as they would not chance any incidents on another 30 year old ride

[Tim Dasco]

AW managed to fill in their paddle boats lake. You just fill it with sand/ remove the concrete.