MSPeconomist

The disclosure appears after two short lead paragraphs that summarize the story, before details appear in the following fifteen paragraphs.

The stuff about his journalism awards appears in his bio at the end of the article, which appears in a different font. It's not part of the article itself.

To me this looks like the normal sort of disclosure that would be required by many financial publications. If the reporter is interested in aviation, it's not unusual that he would invest in several airline stocks.

narvik

Totally agree.

Just not in the one this article is about!

Is there such a thing a objective journalism?


(admittedly, it recovered pretty fast afterward)

mduell

For everyone commenting about the source being Forbes, note it's forbes.com/sites which is really just a collection of random blogs, not actual Forbes content.

wco81

No this couple couldn't have been treated unfairly.

They weren't dragged off the plane after all.

COSPILOT

This is getting old, with some FA's that are overly sensitive, they are right, the customer is wrong attitude. One is gold, one is silver, take a brief moment FA and realize they may not be young anymore, but they aren't once a year travelers. Now to put them on some internal watch list? Pathetic. First thing I would do is jump ship and find a different airline. No need to touch UA again, ever.

Now, I've never had this happen to me with UA, but Sears once did something that made me never care about Sears again, so did Circuit City. Not because of me obviously, but one is out of business, and the other is close behind. I was so mad at Circuit City I celebrated the day they left the industry. With limited seats across the network, UA can do whatever right now, but if/when things slow down, these bad apples in the system could poison future bookings.

jsloan

Sensitive to being physically accosted, you mean? The passenger admits to touching the FA.

This story is presumably as sympathetic as possible to the passengers, given that it's their side of the story, but it comes off as excessively petulant and whiny. It looks like nothing but a shakedown.

COSPILOT

Tapping someone on the shoulder or elbow isn't accosted,assuming the story is correct. If so I have about a thousand claims per year toward others, and a few hundred will have claims toward me. Pinning down a person or grabbing and holding someone without letting go I completely agree.

The couple with no apparent previous problems and both with status are now suddenly on the radar of UA, which doesn't make sense. But somehow a BG5 person apparently took priority. I'd be beyond annoyed if I'm happily seated and some FA says I need to leave the airplane. With or without some alcohol in me, I'd be outspoken.

wco81

How is a 5-3 grandmother physically threatening?

azepine00

Interesting - the mood on UA board seems to have shifted to match typical AA board response..

You werent dragged off the plane like certain others so shut up and be thankful that i am not pressing assault charges for tapping me on the elbow..

narvik

The devil is the detail here though, and it's certainly in their interest to downplay the exact way in which this "tapped her elbow" happened and what was said (and in which tone) at the time.

Silver Fox

Because the FA said so.

Kacee

But obviously subject to Forbes' disclosure rules.

wco81

What could she have possibly done to the stewardess? Pinch her? Sock her on the back of the head? Grab her butt?

bluedemon211

As noted by WineCountry up-thread, this took place 3 months ago. It went to an internal UA review and was dismissed (for lack of a better term). Now the couple find a sympathetic ear and tell their story again. I don't want to be cynical, but this feels like a) half of the story to serve a personal agenda, b) precursor to a civil suit by the couple (note the repeated references they made to Dao, c) a reporter with a bit of an agenda (clickbait if you will). All in all, sounds a bit blown out of proportion to me.

jsloan

Any unwanted touching is assault. (Not all assaults will be, or should be, prosecuted). And, again, I'm assuming this is painted as rosily as possible for the soon-to-be-plaintiffs.