The fate of Falcon Heene, the six-year-old boy believed to have been trapped in a homemade hot-air balloon launched from his family’s Colorado backyard earlier today—”Balloon Boy,” the HuffPo has already dubbed him—is, at this point, unknown. The balloon, now grounded after two hours of wind-whipped flight, was found to be empty. Which means either that Heene was never in the balloon in the first place (good outcome) or that he fell out of the balloon at some point in its journey (very, very bad outcome).
The “Balloon Boy” story—which is, in cable-irresistibility terms, pretty much a car chase wrapped in a sex scandal wrapped in a viral YouTube video wrapped in another car chase—has, needless to say, captivated the news networks. And adding to the captivation is the fact that the Heene family itself—storm chasers who were featured, apparently, on a recent episode of “Wife Swap”—is “known for their risk-taking.” All of which is likely what led MSNBC’s David Shuster, describing the scene just after the balloon had been grounded, to make the following Highly Inappropriate Remark About Today’s Possible Tragedy:
The compartment is empty, which would explain, then, I suppose, the way they are handling it—trying to officially sort of verify that. And then that gets, obviously, to a couple of questions. Did the boy fall out along the way, or is this part of some hoax, an effort for attention by the family a lot of people are already suggesting is a strange family to begin with?
Stay classy, MSNBC.
Inappropriate or not he was correct.
#1 Posted by aleppiek, CJR on Thu 15 Oct 2009 at 07:01 PM
Depends on your definition of "hoax." Shuster was clearly defining it, here, as a publicity ploy on the part of the Heene family. Which was not only (unless new details come out) not correct, but also--given that Shuster made the comment when it was still an open question whether a six-year-old boy had, you know, plummeted to his death--highly, yes, inappropriate.
#2 Posted by Megan Garber, CJR on Thu 15 Oct 2009 at 07:19 PM
Good instincts by Shuster
#3 Posted by ricket, CJR on Fri 16 Oct 2009 at 06:30 AM
If only U.S. journalists had such good instincts about hoaxes outside their borders, such as the battle for freedom in Afghanistan.
#4 Posted by cooney, CJR on Fri 16 Oct 2009 at 06:35 AM
Come on, Megan. The world of cable news took this ridiculous hoax and ran with the thing ALL DAY LONG based upon not a shred of evidence. And lo and behold, it WAS a hoax. Turns out the last part of that statement was correct. And not at all surprising, to any sentient being. Kudos to Schuster for being the lone voice of skepticism here. That's his JOB.
#5 Posted by James, CJR on Fri 16 Oct 2009 at 07:10 AM
In this day in age of sensationalism in the media. I applaud that Shuster was able to see through the Fog of Media, and call it as he saw it. I know in my office colleagues were intimating the same suspicions. Could this have turned out very badly for the family and in turn Shuster yes... However in light of the CNN interview in which Richard Heene was "Outraged" that Wolf Blitzer would want a clarification about what Falcon meant by "it was for the show" and his complete evasiveness about it, I think Shuster hit this dead on.
#6 Posted by aleppiek, CJR on Fri 16 Oct 2009 at 10:27 AM
Balloon Boy pukes live on "Today"
As hoax theories newsmen convey;
Now they're contrarian,
But what's Icarian
Is coverage carried away.
News Short n' Sweet by JFD8
http://twitter.com/JFD8
#7 Posted by JFD8, CJR on Fri 16 Oct 2009 at 11:15 AM
I have a fascination with the mechanics of these kinds of media frenzies, where almost every single "journalist" seemingly simultaneously freaks out and runs to press with some trivial, usually non-newsworthy item, flogs it often for DAYS and DAYS before it plays itself out. The thing, whatever it is, becomes the focus of every single cable channel, who humps it for all it's worth, panels upon panels discuss it, anchors lead with it, much airtime is spent in baseless speculation, the national news organizations and of course Politico pick it up, and even the skeptics are forced to address it because "everyone is talking about it." It is usually a politically-based media frenzy driven by the Republican media machine. There is never any independent news judgment involved.
In this case, a shadowy video appeared, it seems, and from there the completely baseless speculation took hold of the national networks for an entire day. One would hope that some initial judgment would have been made. The video wasn't even interesting, in and of itself, on a local level, let alone dominating the entire national news cycle. There was NO BASIS for any of the speculation, even initially. How are we ever going to take journalism seriously when they constantly display this kind of irresponsible hawking of hoaxes and lies and distortions?
How do these things get started? Are journalists such complete lemmings that they can exercise not even a shred of judgment before they go along with this kind of freak-out? How did YOU get caught up in this, Megan? What was your news "judgment" that had YOU following this? What are your thoughts now that it turns out to be yet another hoax?
I ask sincerely.
#8 Posted by James, CJR on Fri 16 Oct 2009 at 11:33 AM
Thursday's "Highly Inappropriate Remark About Today's Possible Tragedy" becomes Saturday's confirmed fact from the county sheriff's office. Stay classy, MSNBC. Would that all of the cable "news" anchors asked such questions, at least silently. Then they, and us, wouldn't be punked so easily.
#9 Posted by Isaiah J. Poole, CJR on Mon 19 Oct 2009 at 09:25 PM