"The Fine Print", by M.H. Schrader

THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS

(Published in the “Neighborhood Journal” 20 Jan 1999. Posted 03 October 2007.)

Of late, daughter Jacqueline has become fascinated with the Titanic. She has watched the movie, from beginning to end, at least a half-dozen times already. Of course, watching the movie has aroused her curiosity (and mine, too) about why, exactly, the ship sank, and why 1500 souls lost their lives on a cold April night in the North Atlantic.

It in the details. As I have been reading books about the disaster the past several days, it is apparent (to me, at least) that it was the small things that doomed the ship. Like failing to plot the locations of the icefield. Like not having enough lifeboats. Like having rivets that were not strong enough to withstand a glancing blow. If the rivets had been stronger, they wouldn't have popped, and seawater would not have been able to get inside the ship. Yes, a tiny little rivet failing, a tiny detail, can sink a ship.

Remember the tragedy at the Hyatt-Regency in Kansas City, where the walkways fell on the crowd below? You know what caused it? The way they were bolted to the ceiling. Yes, a little teeny tiny bolt, if not bolted right, can kill hundreds.

Flying to D.C. last week, I engaged in an interesting conversation with a fellow passenger about the fear of flying. I told her that after working in the aircraft industry, and actually seeing airplanes built, for the longest time I was scared to death to fly in one, because there are ten of thousands of wires and tens of thousands of rivets and if even one is out of place or incorrect, the plane will crash. The devil is in the detail.

While in D.C., I obtained a copy of my lawsuit against a local city and a local mayor. Up until last week, the only thing that I knew about the suit was what I had read in the newspapers. What the newspapers said, and what the suit says, are not the same. You see, the newspapers reported that I was suing each for $75,000, the implication being that $75,000 is the maximum that I was suing for, and that the settlement could be for less. The actual suit says that I am suing for at least $75,000 from each, meaning that $75,000 from each defendant is the minimum possible settlement, not the maximum.

What does it mean? Well, it means that what the newspapers have presented as a nickel-and-dime lawsuit, isn't. In the end, the courts will decide how large of a judgment to grant; it could be the minimum $75,000, it could be $1,000,000.

Now, I will admit, journalists may not hold lives in their hands like airplane or ship or hotel builders, but they still hold lives in their hands. Journalists have the responsibility to accurately report the news, to get the facts straight. When a journalist fails to do so, a life can be destroyed, as inaccuracies can cause a person to suffer such a severe impugnation of character that his life, as he knows it, ceases to exist.

This is one of the reasons for my intense dislike of one of our weekly newspapers here in Arkansas. Several years ago they published something about me that was flat out false, even though I literally opened up my files to them. Under the guise of truth, they omitted some key facts that completely changed the context of the events that happened. When I called them on it, they hid behind the mantle of "journalistic freedom", whatever that is. It happened again with the election, where several of my platforms were taken out of context, with the result being that I looked like a bloody fool. (If I wouldn't have known the Truth, I wouldn't have voted for me, either.)

As citizens and taxpayers, we have the right to know what is happening with our government. Since the government won't tell us, it is up to journalists to uncover the Truth. Hopefully, they are up to the challenge.

BACK TO “THE FINE PRINT” INDEX