Posted by William Charles on September 9, 2019
Recaps

Published on September 9th, 2019 | by William Charles

22

Recap: British Airways Strike, Panic At Newark & More

 

Deals starting/expiring at the end of today or starting today (view the full deal calendar here):

Deals starting/expiring at end of tomorrow:

Here are some of the most popular posts from past few days:



22
Leave a Reply

avatar
 

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Anonymous
Anonymous

The story mentions [mental] health issues twice (maybe two and a half). Once at the end of one paragraph to show that the airline employee had bipolar disorder and missed her medication. The next paragraph (the half mention) says the Port Authority doesn’t comment on that. The second time is in the immediately following paragraph to show the affected person, Xue, doesn’t believe that any mental health issues would excuse the behavior.

How is that odd? The mental health issue is a potentially relevant issue specifically for the people involved. The article writer does not comment on it at all, only including the reports of the relevant people within it.

What about that makes it bad?

Patrick
Patrick

Either the airlines refuse to state it is a racial profiling and discrimination or the employee has mental problem and Alaska Airline allows people without capable mental stability to handle the work which could pose big safety threat on public safety.

Vy
Vy

You’re serious, right? I would love to see someone figure out a way to medicate racial prejudice away with prescription pills.

Even if the poor paranoid Alaska Airlines employee were diagnosed with a condition and off her meds, any number of things could have triggered an episode. Why did it have to be two unrelated Asian passengers minding their own business? All this incident did was bring the woman’s own bigotry out of her own crazy woodwork.

The problem with these types of incidents is that whenever race is involved, the discussion mysteriously shifts to mental illness because a physiological explanation is somehow more medically acceptable for socially errant behaviors that are not in any way medically excusable.

Anonymous
Anonymous

So are you suggesting that the article writer should not include that detail? That is what this is about. The issue is not whether the lack of medication was the actual cause of the incident. The issue is specifically whether the article writer should have mentioned it at all.

In the interest of complete reporting, I would say that the writer should report those details. The article writer should report all details of any potential relevance to this issue. Your suggestion would require the article writer to omit that, to make a determination of what should and shouldn’t be included. That’s a dangerous slope. Oh, I, as writer, should not include X issue even though it was directly stated by the people involved because i don’t think it should be included.

And in the end, I just disagree with your statement that it shifts the topic from racism to mental health. The entire article ends with Xue’s statement that the mental health issue shouldn’t be an issue.

Peter
Peter

Anonymous – I agree with your assessment. The point Will and Vy are making, I believe, is that Alaska Airlines (as opposed to the journalist) bringing up the employee’s health issue appears to be a cop out from addressing the real issue.

Rick
Rick

Ok let’s talk about mental health then since we’re unwilling to address the real issue. Should someone who can so easily slip into an episode of delusional paranoia if they miss one dose of their medication (if this is what Alaska wants to stick with) be given this much discretionary power and work in such a customer facing role?

Anonymous
Anonymous

This is about the reporting by the author of the article on Buzzfeed. I am saying that the author should still include that information because it was part of the issues. Whether the employee’s behavior actually was due to mental health issues is not the topic here. It is whether the article writer at Buzzfeed should have included it.

What you are suggesting is that the article writer insert their own judgment into the news article and call it news, call it objective fact.

Rick
Rick

Did you even read the Buzzfeed article? No of course you haven’t, otherwise you wouldn’t be saying such nonsense.

The writer clearly mentioned another source said the employee had bipolar disorder and missed her medication. Here I’ll quote it for you:

“Alaska Airlines did not answer any questions about the employee who caused the commotion, saying it does not comment on personnel. CBS 2 reported that a source told them the woman has bipolar disorder and had missed her medication.

Lenis Rodrigues from Port Authority said the employee was questioned and released by Port Authority police, but would not comment on health issues.”

Are these facts objective enough for you?

Anonymous
Anonymous

Did you even read my comment? No, of course you haven’t because you want to sound smart. I specifically mentioned where the statements were. I talked about their paragraphs and the contents of the article.

Are you trolling? YES, that is objective reporting BY THE AUTHOR OF THE ARTICLE. The article reported what other people said. Those other people are not objective, but that is not the issue.

Learn to read what the issue is.

Rick
Rick

So then what exactly is your point? Do you even have a point?

The author reported what other people said for completeness sake. I’m not sure how much more “objective” you want her to be. “He didn’t comment on the mental illness issue…” For real? Again if you’ve actually read the article, you’ll notice the author didn’t provide any of her commentary AT ALL. Even the part where he mentions racial profiling, he’s simply quoting one of the victims who mentioned he felt profiled. At no point in the entire Buzzfeed article does the author inject her own opinion, and the whole piece is simply an account of the events that transpired.

Lemme guess, you’re mad at the title. Would it have made you feel better had she changed it to “What Caused The Mass Panic At Newark Airport? The Mentally Ill” instead?

Anonymous
Anonymous

What is your issue? Honestly, it seems like we are in agreement, but for some reason, YOU are being belligerent and hostile.

I have made my comments about this post. This post on Doctor of Credit. William Charles specifically had written that it was strange that the Buzzfeed article mentioned mental health. I was commenting in response to that. I said it was not strange considering the author of the Buzzfeed article was writing for completeness.

Did you fail to read this post, the one here on Doctor of Credit? You’re overly belligerent despite the fact that we are apparently in agreement that the Buzzfeed article is not bad for writing about what the people said with regard to mental health issues. You’re being hostile even though we are seemingly in agreement.

SamL
SamL

Certainly the employee should be fired, and the airline be held accountable. But, as extreme as this employee’s delusional paranoia is, it is nowhere near as extreme as the delusional paranoia of those who see racism here.

Anonymous
Anonymous

What?

SamL
SamL

There are people who view life through race goggles. They see racism here, there and everywhere. But it’s not reality. It’s just the goggles. Same for other identity goggles. That’s one of the big culture wars today – between those who think everyone should wear the goggles, and those who think everyone should take them off.

Anonymous
Anonymous

But racism, sexism, etc. obviously do exist.

The question is why you think it does not exist here, in this specific case. One of the people affected, Luo, could hear the woman say the word “Asian”. She specifically had gone up to two Chinese men about what she perceived to be a problem. All of the evidence points to it actually being an issue of racism.

Yes, there are people who just have the “goggles”, as you call it. However, the burden is upon you to show that there was no racism in this specific case because the evidence points to it being an issue of racism.

SamL
SamL

The employee was clearly absolutely loony. This situation is completely explained by mental health, and in any case cannot be explain without mental health being the overwhelmingly dominant issue, so there’s really no evidence for racism or anything else. But it’s telling that people are clutching at straws with so-called evidence of racism, and the reason for this is that compared to a few generations ago, racism has almost completely vanished, but certain agendas desperately want to pretend that racism is multiple orders of magnitude bigger than it actually is, so they’ve built a massive propaganda machine to push this view, despite it’s detachment from reality, and the same is true for all forms of identity politics.

Anonymous
Anonymous

It’s telling that you’re literally trying to contradict the most blatant and obvious evidence.

Mental health issues do not exist in a vacuum. Do you know how mental health issues work in the first place? Do you know how bipolar disorder works?

Even if it is completely true that her bipolar disorder was the cause of the issue, that does not mean that it was the ONLY cause. It has to interact with something else. Here, the evidence points strongly in favor of racism being another factor.

You criticize identity politics and use this as an example? It makes you sound ridiculous. It makes you sound like someone with an agenda trying to push a massive propaganda machine. It makes you sound like you’re trying to deny the possibility of racism ever existing, which is laughable on the face of it.

The fact that you say “mental health being the overwhelmingly dominant issue” shows that you don’t know how any of this works. You don’t know how mental health, bipolar disorder, or racism works.

SamL
SamL

Sure, racism exists. But it’s at least 99.9% less than what the PC – identity politics – SJW crowd claims. The fact that they latch onto stories like this, just goes to show how absolutely pissweak their arguments are, and how desperate they are to twist anything into their warped vision.

Anonymous
Anonymous

It shows how weak YOUR argument is.

This whole thread is about this specific article, the Buzzfeed article. In this specific Buzzfeed article, all evidence points to the conclusion that the issue was caused by racism. You have not presented any evidence to dispute that.

Here, we see a case of racism very likely existing. Then you come in saying hey, people falsely talk about racism. The response is that this specific case is very likely real racism. But you’re still over there saying hey, people falsely talk about racism.

At the end of the day, you’re the one desperately twisting this in order to fit your warped vision.

Aditya Shrivastava
Aditya Shrivastava

Are there no consequences to triggering an evacuation for no reason?

Back to Top ↑