New NCR/CC??

[NCRblues]

First off, when did this happen?

Col. Kuddes term was not up so......?

Second, look at this interview....

We are not in anyway the inactive reserve, we do not hold "full rank"  nor do any of our pilots receive training at Maxwell to fly....

I thought Col. Fagan was one of the people removed from command after the pineda incident went down....whats going on??

http://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/stcharles/news/article_032e9aca-3920-56a3-8276-d70dd519758b.html

[MICT1362]

How about the fact that the picture of his flight jacket has two uniform violations...

-Paramedic

[a2capt]

I can see how the press may have gotten the "trained at Maxwell", in the typical chopping they do, all he had to do was say he "went to Maxwell for training" (IE, NSC, BoG related, etc.), and viola! the journalist writes it up and chops this, and that, to make it fit. Reads good, hit the press with it.

The whole thing is practically cut and paste from various sources of PR, so it's no surprise.

[Persona non grata]

All I can say is HUH?      In active reserve

[FW]

First off, when did this happen?

Col. Kuddes term was not up so......?

Yes, his term was up.  He was reinstated in 2008 to complete his orignial term.  He was relieved in 2006 after serving a year in office. 

Trivia question:  Who was the individual who succeded Col Kuddes back then?  (this should be an easy one....)   

[NCRblues]

First off, when did this happen?

Col. Kuddes term was not up so......?

Yes, his term was up.  He was reinstated in 2008 to complete his orignial term.  He was relieved in 2006 after serving a year in office. 

Trivia question:  Who was the individual who succeded Col Kuddes back then?  (this should be an easy one....)   

Ok, but why fagan, he was removed from command after the pineda incident was he not FW? Kuddes, was removed as you said, prematurely. So we just revert back to someone who was a pineda appointee who didn't qualify for the job the first time around let alone the second?

Are we back in the pineda politics again FW? If so i want to know, and i think all members should know.
We don't need more back room play. CAP can not afford it. CAP right now needs openness and an ability to adapt and move on from past mistakes.
Reapointing political junkies who tell major metropolitan newspapers that he "is more or less inactive reserve with full rank" is not helping us at all......

But, from the lack of responses to this i guess i should just 

[PHall]

NCR Blues, who were the other candidates for the job?
You have to be a current or former Wing Commander or higher to qualify for the job.
Kinda narrows down the talant pool.

[NCRblues]

NCR Blues, who were the other candidates for the job?
You have to be a current or former Wing Commander or higher to qualify for the job.
Kinda narrows down the talant pool.

I can think of 4 from the wing i am working for now...that's one wing out of the region...you cant tell me there wasn't anyone with....how do i want to put this...."fresh blood"

[coudano]

kuddes was removed
and replaced with fagan (whom had been appointed mowg/cc by kuddes)

after process (maybe MARB i dont know), kuddes was reinstated
which left fagan out on his ear
fagan was recently (like, 4 months ago) selected as the new mowg/cc (by Col Kuddes --again) when his original term (that was fulfilled by his vice, after Fagan vacated) expired.

kuddes' original term to which he was reinstated has now expired
fagan is both very recently a current and former wing commander and a former region commander (all three of short duration) twice appointed to wing by the same region commander, and appointed to region by two separate national commanders.

if that's not mandate (from above anyway), i don't know what is...

[FW]

Ok, but why fagan, he was removed from command after the pineda incident was he not FW? Kuddes, was removed as you said, prematurely. So we just revert back to someone who was a pineda appointee who didn't qualify for the job the first time around let alone the second?

Are we back in the pineda politics again FW? If so i want to know, and i think all members should know.
We don't need more back room play. CAP can not afford it. CAP right now needs openness and an ability to adapt and move on from past mistakes.
Reapointing political junkies who tell major metropolitan newspapers that he "is more or less inactive reserve with full rank" is not helping us at all......

But, from the lack of responses to this i guess i should just 

It's possible to get answers to your questions however, those questions need to be asked to the people involved.  And, they need to be asked in private.  Col Fagan performed well, as far as I know, during his first term as NCR/CC.  When he agreed to step down, he became Col Kuddes' vice.  He then became the MOWG/CC (again).  Of course "politics" are involved.  Back room?  I have no (verified) idea.  Even if I did know what was going on, it wouldn't be right to discuss it on CT.  These kind of discussions are better vetted at National Board meetings; preferably during elections for the new National Commander and Vice Commander in August....

[JeffDG]

These kind of discussions are better vetted at National Board meetings; preferably during elections for the new National Commander and Vice Commander in August....

It seems the new NCR/CC agrees with you:

I want to keep going to major general, who is in charge of the national CAP.

[bingo]

Fagan was never Col Kuddes' vice.  He basically disappeared when Col Kuddes was reappointed NCR CC.

[A.Member]

First off, when did this happen?

Col. Kuddes term was not up so......?

Second, look at this interview....

We are not in anyway the inactive reserve, we do not hold "full rank"  nor do any of our pilots receive training at Maxwell to fly....

I thought Col. Fagan was one of the people removed from command after the pineda incident went down....whats going on??

http://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/stcharles/news/article_032e9aca-3920-56a3-8276-d70dd519758b.html

That article is full of FAIL!

Since the article/interview is public he needs to come forward now and clarify nearly all those statements. 
The following response is particularly problematic, especially given his position: 

I joined the Civil Air Patrol in 1995 because I wanted to be a pilot. Flying is something I always wanted to do. I took my flight training in St. Louis, then went to Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama. I worked my way up the ranks. Now, I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve, but I still hold a full rank.

I see only one of 3 possibilities:
1.  Journalist completely mis-quoted him on everything (perhaps a few minor errors are likely but all of that and to be so blatantly wrong?)
2.  He's ignorant and doesn't fully understand his role (not likely)
3.  He misrepresented his position and CAP

I hope National sees this one.

[Eclipse]

Actually..

If we read what is on the page, not filtered through our own sensitivities regarding these issues, there isn't anything there that isn't factual, and appropriate.

To my objective read,

I joined the Civil Air Patrol in 1995 because I wanted to be a pilot.

Just like tens of thousands of other members.

Flying is something I always wanted to do. I took my flight training in St. Louis, then went to Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama.

What's is wrong here?

He learned to fly in St. Louis, then he went to AL.  It doesn't say CAP trained him, nor that he took flight training in AL.

I worked my way up the ranks. Now, I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve, but I still hold a full rank.

Obviously he worked his way up, just like the rest of us, and he is on "inactive reserve" as a pilot.  He mentions elsewhere in
the article that he doesn't get to fly missions much anymore, which is pretty typical for commanders of headquarters components
in CAP who get bogged down in administration.

And he has full rank in CAP.

Just read what is there.  Poor word choice?  Maybe.  But there is likely a whole lot of reporter attention span issue here as well.

[A.Member]

Obviously he worked his way up, just like the rest of us, and he is on "inactive reserve" as a pilot. Just read what is there.

There is no such thing as "inactive reserve", especially as a pilot.  It's not a term we ever use in any context.

Poor word choice?  Maybe. 

Not even maybe.  Absolutely and it should be corrected publicly.

[G+10]

The photo of the flight jacket concerns me more than what might have been said.

[Spaceman3750]

The photo of the flight jacket concerns me more than what might have been said.

Yeah... What's with the green grade?

[A.Member]

The photo of the flight jacket concerns me more than what might have been said.

The two are not mutually exclusive.  The package as a whole, the way it was presented, is problematic.

[flyboy53]

Hope Ma Blue hasn't picked it up yet. Sounds like he commands a CAP Region in HALO and has beem spending too much time on X-Box 360 or Virtual CAP.

Talk about a way of re-inventing the facts. The way that story's written, I really question his command capabilities. Sounds like he's ready to deploy to Iraq.

Let's hope that his Maj. Gen. aspirations are never realized. In the meantime, bet you that NCR is in for quite a ride.

Hey! Why hasn't JohnKachenmeister commented about those aircrew name patches and the subdued rank. Is that the new insignia for the Smurf Suit?

[JeffDG]

Talk about a way of re-inventing the facts. The way that story's written, I really question his command capabilities. Sounds like he's ready to deploy to Iraq.

OK, I have no dog in this fight at all, not in the region, never been in any of the wings therein, never met the guy, could pass him on the street and have nary a clue who he is...

But you're willing to question is command capabilities because of how a reporter wrote a story?  Seriously?  Pray that someone like you never passes judgement on a story you become involved in, because press reports generally have only a passing semblance to what actually occurred.

[davidsinn]

Talk about a way of re-inventing the facts. The way that story's written, I really question his command capabilities. Sounds like he's ready to deploy to Iraq.

OK, I have no dog in this fight at all, not in the region, never been in any of the wings therein, never met the guy, could pass him on the street and have nary a clue who he is...

But you're willing to question is command capabilities because of how a reporter wrote a story?  Seriously?  Pray that someone like you never passes judgement on a story you become involved in, because press reports generally have only a passing semblance to what actually occurred.

There is the story and then there is his inability to follow the uniform manual which shows a disregard for the rules or an ignorance of the rules. Neither of which is a good quality for a region commander.

[1LtNurseOfficer]

There is no such thing as "inactive reserve", especially as a pilot.  It's not a term we ever use in any context.

Umm.... The Army (at least) has the Inactive Ready Reserve.

[Spaceman3750]

There is no such thing as "inactive reserve", especially as a pilot.  It's not a term we ever use in any context.

Umm.... The Army (at least) has the Inactive Ready Reserve.

All of the branches have an inactive reserve component. The point was that CAP doesn't. I really don't see why the Colonel's remark about being on "inactive reserve" is getting some people riled up so badly...

[cap235629]

"The second is as colonel and future commander of the North Central Region of the Civil Air Patrol, a branch of the U.S. Air Force."

"The Civil Air Patrol is responsible for almost all search-and-rescue missions in the United States."

EPIC FAIL

[flyboy53]

Talk about a way of re-inventing the facts. The way that story's written, I really question his command capabilities. Sounds like he's ready to deploy to Iraq.

OK, I have no dog in this fight at all, not in the region, never been in any of the wings therein, never met the guy, could pass him on the street and have nary a clue who he is...

But you're willing to question is command capabilities because of how a reporter wrote a story?  Seriously?  Pray that someone like you never passes judgement on a story you become involved in, because press reports generally have only a passing semblance to what actually occurred.

I will certainly pass judgement, reporter or no reporter. I'm a former group commander and this man is an incoming region commander who commands far more assets and resources than I ever did.

Also, I have about 30 years experience in the broadcast and print medias: Don't just blame the reporter. Certainly a reporter can skew the facts based on his or her perspective. However, the reporter is only transferring to print what he was told. So, again no excuse.

Certainly NCR is in for quite a ride.

From past experience, you can tell an awful lot about how a person will command by the example he sets in his appearance and the tone of what he says in public. It sets the tone for those under his comamnd during his tenure as a commander. I would hope a true commander would honestly explain his duties and the missions of CAP because he sets the example, and his tone serves as a recruiting tool .... unless of course he knows something the rest of us don't know .... and then the entire organization is in for quite a ride.

[JeffDG]

From past experience, you can tell an awful lot about how a person will command by the example he sets in his appearance and the tone of what he says in public. It sets the tone for those under his comamnd during his tenure as a commander. I would hope a true commander would honestly explain his duties and the missions of CAP because he sets the example, and his tone serves as a recruiting tool .... unless of course he knows something the rest of us don't know .... and then the entire organization is in for quite a ride.

But that's the point.  You have not a clue what the new NCR/CC said to the reporter, only those out-of-context snippets the reporter and editor allowed to get into the story.

[a2capt]

...and if it gets into print/television/distribution and it's got points in it that have turned out to mis-represent, then it's the interviewee's responsibility to clarify that and take the opportunity to throw the reporter under the bus over it if need be.

But I'm leaning towards the side of "intent", after all.. a picture is worth a thousand words.  We'll see.

[A.Member]

From past experience, you can tell an awful lot about how a person will command by the example he sets in his appearance and the tone of what he says in public. It sets the tone for those under his comamnd during his tenure as a commander. I would hope a true commander would honestly explain his duties and the missions of CAP because he sets the example, and his tone serves as a recruiting tool .... unless of course he knows something the rest of us don't know .... and then the entire organization is in for quite a ride.

But that's the point.  You have not a clue what the new NCR/CC said to the reporter, only those out-of-context snippets the reporter and editor allowed to get into the story.

And likewise,  how do you know his comments are out of context?

[JeffDG]

From past experience, you can tell an awful lot about how a person will command by the example he sets in his appearance and the tone of what he says in public. It sets the tone for those under his comamnd during his tenure as a commander. I would hope a true commander would honestly explain his duties and the missions of CAP because he sets the example, and his tone serves as a recruiting tool .... unless of course he knows something the rest of us don't know .... and then the entire organization is in for quite a ride.

But that's the point.  You have not a clue what the new NCR/CC said to the reporter, only those out-of-context snippets the reporter and editor allowed to get into the story.

And likewise,  how do you know his comments are out of context?

Really?  I guarantee they are out of context.  Unless the entire interview transcript is printed, there will necessarily be some choosing of the quotes used.

That said, I find it disturbing that people are willing to hang a man who seems to have proven himself to at least two national commanders as qualified for the job he's beginning on the basis of a rather short and sloppily written news article.

[caphornbuckle]

A couple of things came to my attention when I read this thread and the article:

1 - Civil Air Patrol Wings do have a Reserve unit, usually with the XXX-XX-000 designator.  If he was inactive and assigned to this unit, he did state fact.

2 - The jacket may not be for uniform wear.  It could be something he has hanging on his chair or somewhere that the photographer took a snapshot of.  Notice it doesn't show any part of him in the jacket?  It is strange that the patches are out of whack, but is it wrong to have one at all?

3 - Sometimes we have to "dumb down" things when we talk to the press.  This is so both the reporter and the reader can better understand what is going on without having to spend more words (which is usually limited to a specific number) on explaining it.  Can you explain your history in roughly 700 words using simple, non-complex language?

[SARDOC]

How about the fact that the picture of his flight jacket has two uniform violations...

-Paramedic

I know he didn't buy that nameplate with the CAP design on it from Vanguard 

[A.Member]

That said, I find it disturbing that people are willing to hang a man who seems to have proven himself to at least two national commanders as qualified for the job he's beginning on the basis of a rather short and sloppily written news article.

No one is hanging him.  What is being asked is that, if indeed the reporter "got it wrong", he step-up and clarify the discrepencies in the story.   

A couple of things came to my attention when I read this thread and the article:

1 - Civil Air Patrol Wings do have a Reserve unit, usually with the XXX-XX-000 designator.  If he was inactive and assigned to this unit, he did state fact.

2 - The jacket may not be for uniform wear.  It could be something he has hanging on his chair or somewhere that the photographer took a snapshot of.  Notice it doesn't show any part of him in the jacket?  It is strange that the patches are out of whack, but is it wrong to have one at all?

3 - Sometimes we have to "dumb down" things when we talk to the press.  This is so both the reporter and the reader can better understand what is going on without having to spend more words (which is usually limited to a specific number) on explaining it.  Can you explain your history in roughly 700 words using simple, non-complex language?

or....

Occam's Razor

As to the last part of your question, yes.  I can and often do explain the organization accurately and concisely.  Given his position, I expect he should be able to do so as well.

[NCRblues]

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.

It really amazes me that we have people in this organization that still automatically defend someone. Did we all not learn from the past national commander, that just because you are appointed a position, does not mean you are a saint?

I know that Col. Fagan and some of his staff read captalk, so, Colonel....If you truly have the best intrest in CAP, than call up the newspaper and ask for another interview. Clarify and remove some of the statements. When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

CAP at this moment needs openness and a steady leadership. Some of you will not believe me, but i know for a fact we are still on rocky ground with the AF. Plus with the budget constraints coming from congress, i believe this year will be a long drawn out battle on many levels....

[tsrup]

Some of you will not believe me, but i know for a fact we are still on rocky ground with the AF.

Can you clarify this?

[Major Carrales]

Yes, let's see some fact and substantial evidence to show that "rocky ground."  Making statements like that requires documentation...if not, it's a lie at worst and a rumor at best.

[NCRblues]

Yes, let's see some fact and substantial evidence to show that "rocky ground."  Making statements like that requires documentation...if not, it's a lie at worst and a rumor at best.

There is no documentation. I have conversations with people in the know, and they are not happy about a few appointments and happenings on the NEC and NB. Simple as that, but thanks for calling me a lier.



and if you really need to know details, you can PM me and i will give you what i can. I will not tarnish the trust some of these people have placed in me, but i will tell you what i can.

[FW]

Now boys, please be nice....

We are not on "rocky ground" with the Air Force however, we do need to get our act together at a "certain level" of our leadership...

The fact that the BoG is willing to spend $100k out of our piggy bank to study our future governance is significant.  The Fact that there have been multiple complaints about the BoG and certain members of our National Leadership is significant and, the fact that we most likely will not be getting that  $4 million plus up this year is significant.

Now that Col Fagan IS the NCR/CC, I truly hope he can help solve some of the issues facing us.  Name calling is really counterproductive.

[Eclipse]

Angels and Saints preserve us we are all a bunch of old women kvetching in the church basement about Millie's new hat (poster included).

[Spaceman3750]

Angels and Saints preserve us we are all a bunch of old women kvetching in the church basement about Millie's new hat (poster included).

But it's purple and we're all wearing green!

[FARRIER]

Its closer to pink.....

Angels and Saints preserve us we are all a bunch of old women kvetching in the church basement about Millie's new hat (poster included).

But it's purple and we're all wearing green!

[Nathan]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

[NCRblues]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

Uh, no sorry.
When you volunteer to be a Region/cc, the person in charge of 8 states, your press releases should be clear and consistant. Telling anyone, ever, that we are the "inactive reserve, but we hold full rank" is unacceptable.

The picture of the flight jacket is unacceptable, ESPECAILLY since his whole interview is based around him "working up the ranks".... I'm sorry, but by Colonel, you should have your uniform squared away with no problems at all.

Col. Fagan, wait no....ANY of us should correct ANY misconception that may be out about CAP. Letting someone "think" we do one thing, and then letting them find out the hard way that we don't do that is waste, fraud, and abuse....

[Nathan]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

Uh, no sorry.
When you volunteer to be a Region/cc, the person in charge of 8 states, your press releases should be clear and consistant. Telling anyone, ever, that we are the "inactive reserve, but we hold full rank" is unacceptable.

The picture of the flight jacket is unacceptable, ESPECAILLY since his whole interview is based around him "working up the ranks".... I'm sorry, but by Colonel, you should have your uniform squared away with no problems at all.

Col. Fagan, wait no....ANY of us should correct ANY misconception that may be out about CAP. Letting someone "think" we do one thing, and then letting them find out the hard way that we don't do that is waste, fraud, and abuse....

Erm, I'm not convinced you actually read my post. You simply saw that it wasn't the point you were trying to make, and attacked it. Read it again. I clearly wasn't defending his apparent actions, nor do I think that it should be acceptable to put out bad information.

Let me know when you take a closer look, and we can actually talk about it. I am definitely interested in where you saw that I advocated "waste, fraud, and abuse".

[A.Member]

FWIW, while I agree with the general perspective that all press should be accurate and well done, I highly doubt that we are going to see a significant negative effect due to an interview posted in some suburban journal. The people who know better are not going to quit, and the prospective members won't know any better.

I mean, even if we assume the worst and that there was misrepresentation, exactly what has he said that hurts the organization or membership as a whole? Even a slight exaggeration is not going to be significantly different than a typical recruiting speech.

When I was a recruiting officer, and was going over the missions of CAP, I had to mention "Emergency Services", and cover Search and Rescue, Disaster Relief (IE, we were at Katrina, active during 9/11), etc. And, despite me saying the truth, you want to guess how many active "rescue" type missions we get in Kansas? We don't exactly have a lot of planes crashing into mountains out here. But I'm sure that because I mentioned that the CAP organization does SAR, people joined thinking they were going to be diving out of planes to rescue people from the terrorists.

I'm sure we all joined CAP with some misconception of what it was going to be like, and more than likely, that misconception was an exaggeration of something we thought was going to be really cool. After we join, we figure out that the thing we thought would be in CAP isn't really there, but we find other, cool things to enjoy as members. That's just sort of the way it works. Recruiters don't even have to lie to see this phenomenon.

My point is that the interview didn't represent anything that looks like it would seriously damage the reputation or public confidence in CAP. We, the CAP geeks on the internet, can cite every reason why any statement is wrong, and we can probably all agree that such misrepresentations shouldn't occur if at all possible.

But let's not treat this like it's some hugely damaging offense that could mark the end of CAP as we know it. If anyone joins with a misconception of how the pilot thing works, the only thing that's going to happen is that either the recruiter is going to correct the perception, or the perception will be corrected with experience. And if the member doesn't like it, he doesn't join/leaves/finds something else to do. I see no reason it would go beyond that.

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters.  We must hold ourselves accountable.

[Nathan]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

[NCRblues]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

[A.Member]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

No, it doesn't.  I'm not saying he did or did not lie.  I don't know.  What I do know is there are inaccurate representations in the story that he should take upon himself to correct.   No assumptions are needed for that. 

[JeffDG]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

Col:  No, we're not at all an active reserve of the USAF.  Reporter just got his "word of the day" calendar and say "inactive" means "not active" and put the word in.

Col:  I used to have  the rank of Lt. Col.  Now I have the rank of full Col.

Generally speaking, in my experience, reporters are idiots.  From reading newspapers you would think the leading cause of aircraft accidents was the fact that people don't file flight plans for VFR.  If it comes down to me taking the word of a reporter over someone appointed to the National Executive Committee by not one, but two National Commanders...well, I'll give the Col. the benefit of the doubt. 

[NCRblues]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

Col:  No, we're not at all an active reserve of the USAF.  Reporter just got his "word of the day" calendar and say "inactive" means "not active" and put the word in.

Col:  I used to have  the rank of Lt. Col.  Now I have the rank of full Col.

Generally speaking, in my experience, reporters are idiots.  From reading newspapers you would think the leading cause of aircraft accidents was the fact that people don't file flight plans for VFR.  If it comes down to me taking the word of a reporter over someone appointed to the National Executive Committee by not one, but two National Commanders...well, I'll give the Col. the benefit of the doubt.

Yes because the first national commander was such an outstanding guy, and did amazing things for CAP....

This is amazing, if this would have been a squadron PAO, or something other than a region commander, you all would be screaming about how they need better training on how to handle publice affairs.

This man should....no MUST be held to a higher standard than the average member running around. He has a chance to fix this, the reporter is willing to do another one and fix the mistakes, yet so far he has not done so....

[Eclipse]

This man should....no MUST be held to a higher standard than the average member running around. He has a chance to fix this, the reporter is willing to do another one and fix the mistakes, yet so far he has not done so....

And you know this, how?

[a2capt]

And you know this, how?

Because

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.  .... .. .... When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

[A.Member]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

Col:  No, we're not at all an active reserve of the USAF.  Reporter just got his "word of the day" calendar and say "inactive" means "not active" and put the word in.

Col:  I used to have  the rank of Lt. Col.  Now I have the rank of full Col.

Generally speaking, in my experience, reporters are idiots.  From reading newspapers you would think the leading cause of aircraft accidents was the fact that people don't file flight plans for VFR.  If it comes down to me taking the word of a reporter over someone appointed to the National Executive Committee by not one, but two National Commanders...well, I'll give the Col. the benefit of the doubt.

I agree that reporters make mistakes sometimes, as we all do.   

Here's my question though:  Did the same reporter write this blog post in Oct of 2010?
http://hometownonline.blogspot.com/2010/10/lake-saint-louis-resident-appointed.html

On September 25, 2010, Colonel Sean Fagan, of Lake Saint Louis, was recently appointed as Wing Commander for the State of Missouri's United States Air Force, Civil Air Patrol. Colonel Fagan is responsible for all the activities and assets assigned to the Missouri Wing, including it's 1200 personnel.

The headquarters for the Missouri Wing is located at Whiteman Air Force Base in Knobnoster, Missouri. The Civic Air Patrol, a division of the United States Air Force, is responsible for 98% of all inland search and rescue missions for the Air Force and State of Missouri, as well as humanitarian missions.

Colonel Fagan is a graduate of Concordia University and the United States Air Force Command and Staff College.

Has similar issues.  Coincidence?  Perhaps...

[NCRblues]

And you know this, how?

Because

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.  .... .. .... When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

Thank you...but I'm sure eclipse wont accept this since its not stamped from the newspaper, sworn under oath in front of a federal judge and approved by JCS....

[CAPOfficer]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

After reviewing the article, I truly do not see any real issues.  First off, he is simply attempting to define something to an individual (and the public who will be reading this article) who most likely knows nothing about CAP.  When he references the Air Force term "inactive reserve", he does not say that he is in the inactive reserve, but that "I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve..."  He is doing nothing more than giving the reporter an example or model for comparison.  The sentence is closed by "but I still hold a full rank".  Understanding that former wing and region commanders do not always retain the rank upon leaving office, the full rank in this case (for me at least) states that he did not revert back to his previous rank, that of a Lt Col.  It may not be the best way to express it, but it is one way none the less.

You are correct, aerial reconnaissance is not one of our main missions.  However; in reviewing the article, I see a person who wanted to bring the ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance) program to center stage with the public.  Perhaps he should have given the three missions of CAP first and then got more explicit on the ARCHER program.  Because he did not, it does not imply that he does not know the three missions of CAP.  I do not believe that anyone who has previously served as a wing commander (twice) and a region commander prior to this appointment does not know the missions of CAP.

All commanders are held to a high standard, not just wing/region commanders.  As for the comment "what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power", I again disagree.  I have noted that CAP members question their superiors almost constantly. However, the method they choose in questioning those decisions is what makes it proper or improper.  While a commander's authority is derived from our Constitutions & Bylaws and regulations, I believe "power" comes from respect, not fear of questioning.

I also see no implication or potential situation of Fraud, Waste or Abuse (FW&A).  It looks as if you are implying that because he mentioned the ARCHER program, FW&A can logically be the (a) result; I disagree.

At this point, I challenge you to follow-through in correcting these "small violations" as you see them by contacting the region commander directly with your concerns on his interview.  You have already contacted the Newspaper and given a report of your findings; therefore, it is only proper now for you to speak with the region commander to corroborate or cancel out your assertions.  To do any less in my opinion will speak volumes as to why this issue was raised to begin with.

His email address can be found on the NCR Website listed under NCR Staff Roster.

[NCRblues]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

After reviewing the article, I truly do not see any real issues.  First off, he is simply attempting to define something to an individual (and the public who will be reading this article) who most likely knows nothing about CAP.  When he references the Air Force term "inactive reserve", he does not say that he is in the inactive reserve, but that "I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve..."  He is doing nothing more than giving the reporter an example or model for comparison.  The sentence is closed by "but I still hold a full rank".  Understanding that former wing and region commanders do not always retain the rank upon leaving office, the full rank in this case (for me at least) states that he did not revert back to his previous rank, that of a Lt Col.  It may not be the best way to express it, but it is one way none the less.

You are correct, aerial reconnaissance is not one of our main missions.  However; in reviewing the article, I see a person who wanted to bring the ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance) program to center stage with the public.  Perhaps he should have given the three missions of CAP first and then got more explicit on the ARCHER program.  Because he did not, it does not imply that he does not know the three missions of CAP.  I do not believe that anyone who has previously served as a wing commander (twice) and a region commander prior to this appointment does not know the missions of CAP.

All commanders are held to a high standard, not just wing/region commanders.  As for the comment "what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power", I again disagree.  I have noted that CAP members question their superiors almost constantly. However, the method they choose in questioning those decisions is what makes it proper or improper.  While a commander's authority is derived from our Constitutions & Bylaws and regulations, I believe "power" comes from respect, not fear of questioning.

I also see no implication or potential situation of Fraud, Waste or Abuse (FW&A).  It looks as if you are implying that because he mentioned the ARCHER program, FW&A can logically be the (a) result; I disagree.

At this point, I challenge you to follow-through in correcting these "small violations" as you see them by contacting the region commander directly with your concerns on his interview.  You have already contacted the Newspaper and given a report of your findings; therefore, it is only proper now for you to speak with the region commander to corroborate or cancel out your assertions.  To do any less in my opinion will speak volumes as to why this issue was raised to begin with.

His email address can be found on the NCR Website listed under NCR Staff Roster.

I'm not sure how there are NO problems with this interview.... WE CAN NOT TELL PEOPLE WE ARE (OR EVEN LIKE) THE INACTIVE RESERVE. He can not fly EVERY aircraft that CAP owns. Our main mission is in no way the ARCHER system. His uniform jacket that was shown on the front of the story is out of regs...badly. How is this not a problem. I have already sent him and email and made phone calls.

Shockingly i did not get a response back....(sarcasm)

Over half of the region staff submitted their letters of resignation because he was reappointed... this man was a pawn for pineda.

During the 2005 national boards that were held in St Louis, he was a freshly  promoted major. Pineda got elected and the next week fagan was the next wing king... He was removed from the position of region commander once....why are we trying again??? IS IT NOT TIME FOR CAP TO TRY SOMETHING NEW?

I have tried to contact him, i have tried to contact NHQ about this....(btw the standard press release the MUST follow all press realises was not attached to this one....that's a national requirement if i am not mistaken )

This is not what cap needs right now...not at all....you may all keep defending him, and others like him, and i admit one article wont do A LOT of harm, but many articles like this one will..... He is in a position of power, to the outside world his word would SEEM like law in cap.... a civilian will see the word commander and think, well he knows everything about that organization that he can.... he must be right...BUT LOW AND BEHOLD HE IS WRONG.....

[Eclipse]

And you know this, how?

Because

I have made contact with the St. Louis post dispatch and asked if a clarification would be coming out. They stated "we have no idea, whats in the story is what he said, its a simple Q & A set". They also told me, i was not the only one to call and question this article.  .... .. .... When i was on the phone with the newspaper they said that they would be more than happy to do another one....

Thank you...but I'm sure eclipse wont accept this since its not stamped from the newspaper, sworn under oath in front of a federal judge and approved by JCS....

I will absolutely accept it, in fact that is, and you missed, my point.  Why do you believe it is your mission in life to "fix" this?

This is the kind of situation that, assuming a fix is needed, is best handled in private. whether that is simply a conversation between like-minded volunteers, or someone actually appointed as a spokesperson contacting the media regarding the clarifications.

No good comes to CAP in this by a bunch a people calling this reporter and pointing out the foibles.But I see we agree on that point.

This is not what cap needs right now...not at all....you may all keep defending him, and others like him, and i admit one article wont do A LOT of harm, but many articles like this one will....

There is a difference between "defending him", and accepting the reality that in the grand scheme of the Great Plan, this requires nothing but a sigh and a couple of phone calls.

[CAPOfficer]

I'd say review our core values, particularly integrity and excellence.   When one considers his position in the organization, it matters. 

That only works when you assume that he deliberately lied. If you're willing to make that assumption, fine. But that's not for all of us.

I read it, and reread it. I stand by what i said..

Now, I'm not saying he lied out and out, but where does a reporter from a st Louis suburb (which is 2 hours away from the nearest military instillation and st Louis no longer has a ARNG unit in it) get the terms "inactive reserve" "full rank".

The reporter put in what fagan said word for word ( i called and asked, they are very very nice people). I did not know the main mission of civil air patrol was "aerial reconnaissance" did you?? I thought our main missions were emergency services, cadet programs and aerospace education...but meh i could be wrong....

He should be held to a high standard because he is NCR/CC...what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power....

I never said YOU committed F.W.A., but allowing people to come join cap, waste our time and tax payer funded money for something we don't do, or do very very little of IS F.W.A.....plain and simple

After reviewing the article, I truly do not see any real issues.  First off, he is simply attempting to define something to an individual (and the public who will be reading this article) who most likely knows nothing about CAP.  When he references the Air Force term “inactive reserve”, he does not say that he is in the inactive reserve, but that “I'm in what you might call the inactive reserve…”  He is doing nothing more than giving the reporter an example or model for comparison.  The sentence is closed by “but I still hold a full rank”.  Understanding that former wing and region commanders do not always retain the rank upon leaving office, the full rank in this case (for me at least) states that he did not revert back to his previous rank, that of a Lt Col.  It may not be the best way to express it, but it is one way none the less.

You are correct, aerial reconnaissance is not one of our main missions.  However; in reviewing the article, I see a person who wanted to bring the ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance) program to center stage with the public.  Perhaps he should have given the three missions of CAP first and then got more explicit on the ARCHER program.  Because he did not, it does not imply that he does not know the three missions of CAP.  I do not believe that anyone who has previously served as a wing commander (twice) and a region commander prior to this appointment does not know the missions of CAP.

All commanders are held to a high standard, not just wing/region commanders.  As for the comment “what he says is thought to be law because he is in a position of power”, I again disagree.  I have noted that CAP members question their superiors almost constantly. However, the method they choose in questioning those decisions is what makes it proper or improper.  While a commander’s authority is derived from our Constitutions & Bylaws and regulations, I believe “power” comes from respect, not fear of questioning.

I also see no implication or potential situation of Fraud, Waste or Abuse (FW&A).  It looks as if you are implying that because he mentioned the ARCHER program, FW&A can logically be the (a) result; I disagree.

At this point, I challenge you to follow-through in correcting these “small violations” as you see them by contacting the region commander directly with your concerns on his interview.  You have already contacted the Newspaper and given a report of your findings; therefore, it is only proper now for you to speak with the region commander to corroborate or cancel out your assertions.  To do any less in my opinion will speak volumes as to why this issue was raised to begin with.

His email address can be found on the NCR Website listed under NCR Staff Roster.

I'm not sure how there are NO problems with this interview.... WE CAN NOT TELL PEOPLE WE ARE (OR EVEN LIKE) THE INACTIVE RESERVE. He can not fly EVERY aircraft that CAP owns. Our main mission is in no way the ARCHER system. His uniform jacket that was shown on the front of the story is out of regs...badly. How is this not a problem. I have already sent him and email and made phone calls.

Shockingly i did not get a response back....(sarcasm)

Over half of the region staff submitted their letters of resignation because he was reappointed... this man was a pawn for pineda.

During the 2005 national boards that were held in St Louis, he was a freshly  promoted major. Pineda got elected and the next week fagan was the next wing king... He was removed from the position of region commander once....why are we trying again??? IS IT NOT TIME FOR CAP TO TRY SOMETHING NEW?

I have tried to contact him, i have tried to contact NHQ about this....(btw the standard press release the MUST follow all press realises was not attached to this one....that's a national requirement if i am not mistaken )

This is not what cap needs right now...not at all....you may all keep defending him, and others like him, and i admit one article wont do A LOT of harm, but many articles like this one will..... He is in a position of power, to the outside world his word would SEEM like law in cap.... a civilian will see the word commander and think, well he knows everything about that organization that he can.... he must be right...BUT LOW AND BEHOLD HE IS WRONG.....

And I thought you were upset with the interview.  This goes a lot deeper with you than a picture or the statements he made in an interview.  Your banter about his use of words, speculative innuendos with General Pineda and now telling us what National "must" do; this about you.

You believe if you shriek loud enough, long enough, everyone else will fall in line with your banter.  Not so, shouting at people (the use of uppercase) is not necessary or acceptable in any communication.

If I am incorrect, please show me documented proof that he was removed for cause as region commander.  Show me a picture of him wearing this jacket in uniform.  Show me documented proof of a backroom deal between him and General Pineda (as his pawn). Show me how he destroyed and crippled the organization by not answering the reporters question directly, as you believe he should have.  Show me the FW&A you alluded too.  Show me all this and I will admit I was wrong; however, if you cannot...

[Mustang]

If I am incorrect, please show me documented proof that he was removed for cause as region commander.  Show me a picture of him wearing this jacket in uniform.  Show me documented proof of a backroom deal between him and General Pineda (as his pawn). Show me how he destroyed and crippled the organization by not answering the reporters question directly, as you believe he should have.  Show me the FW&A you alluded too.  Show me all this and I will admit I was wrong; however, if you cannot...

I don't know about any of that, but his statement "I can fly any airplane that the patrol has." is not presently true; according to eServices, he doesn't hold a current Form 5 in any aircraft.

[a2capt]

"the patrol"?, too. Just the wording on some of those replies bugs me, but thats not to say it wasn't edited by unfamiliar journalists. I'm willing to believe that on the wording, though not likely considering the rest of whats going on. But I would hope one wouldn't refer to their own organization in such a passive way.

[MO10]

Shocking, absolutely shocking...

I can't believe all of this over an article that appeared in the "St. Louis Post Disgrace."  Some have been able to keep their emotions and fondness for Col Kuddes in check, others...well not so much.  Over the years dealing with the press one thing is for sure.  If you don't spell it out for them a certain amount of literary license will be used; even then there is no guarantee.

I have met both of the officers discussed in this thread.  While each have their own agenda they still have the best interests of CAP in mind, whether I agreed with them or not.

While I know this will open a can of worms.  The picture of the flight jacket (which seems to be a point of contention for NCRBlues).  I can't seem to find any CAP distinctive markings...except for the wings.  Oh wait, John Q. Public won't associate those with anything other than a design of wings with a "triangle thingy" in it.

If this is type of useless "learning" that takes place on this forum I'm not sure I made a good choice by joining.

[NCRblues]

Shocking, absolutely shocking...

I can't believe all of this over an article that appeared in the "St. Louis Post Disgrace."  Some have been able to keep their emotions and fondness for Col Kuddes in check, others...well not so much.  Over the years dealing with the press one thing is for sure.  If you don't spell it out for them a certain amount of literary license will be used; even then there is no guarantee.

I have met both of the officers discussed in this thread.  While each have their own agenda they still have the best interests of CAP in mind, whether I agreed with them or not.

While I know this will open a can of worms.  The picture of the flight jacket (which seems to be a point of contention for NCRBlues).  I can't seem to find any CAP distinctive markings...except for the wings.  Oh wait, John Q. Public won't associate those with anything other than a design of wings with a "triangle thingy" in it.

If this is type of useless "learning" that takes place on this forum I'm not sure I made a good choice by joining.

i do not remember anyone on this board promissing "learning" at all...in fact we argue and fight more than anything on this board.

Yes, it is no secret i have a major problem with corporate officers openly misleading readers that have no idea what CAP is....
This man was given a chance to fix the errors made in the article, and he refused. He has no form 5 on file, can not pilot a single aircraft let alone "all the aircraft CAP has".... i can go on but i wont, if you wish you can PM me and we can discuss this more.

[Briski]

Whatever else this situation might be, I think it's an important opportunity for us to learn about journalism and working with public affairs professionals.

I was interviewed once for an article in CAP News, and when I got the "final draft" version to review before printing, I noticed that the author didn't have the name of the activity quite right. I already had some major revisions that I wanted to request, and I didn't want to seem like I was ripping the whole article to shreds. Besides, I figured that one of the 4-5 other people who had been interviewed would have made the correction. So I let it slide.

When the article was printed with the incorrect activity name, I rolled my eyes. How embarrassing for the journalist, who couldn't even do enough research to get the name of the activity right.

...but then I realized that if anyone were to blame, it had to be me.

I was the volunteer involved in the activity, not the journalist.

I had the chance to make the correction, and I chose not to.

How embarrassing for a CAP officer who tries to teach cadets about professionalism, who had the chance to proofread the article and still signed off on a rather silly error.

Conversely, I also had an experience once where misinformation was spread because of edits made after I'd approved the "final draft" before printing. Some career fields function on really tight deadlines, and journalism is one of them. The misinformation spread, in my case, was nothing too drastic, and I know that the journalist did not intend to deceive anyone. It was simply an oversimplification of information—such an oversimplification, in fact, that the information presented actually became misinformation.

In the end, it seems to me that public affairs stuff is a team effort. If I'm interviewing someone, it's on me to make sure I do everything in my power to represent everything he/she says in a way that the average reader can understand and appreciate. If I'm being interviewed, it's on me to make sure I give the person interviewing me the best possible opportunity for good reporting.

Please note that I have never met Col Fagan, so I choose to refrain from making comments on his character and making speculations regarding the "rightness" of his selection to serve as region commander.

[NIN]

Whatever else this situation might be, I think it's an important opportunity for us to learn about journalism and working with public affairs professionals.[...]

Conversely, I also had an experience once where misinformation was spread because of edits made after I'd approved the "final draft" before printing. Some career fields function on really tight deadlines, and journalism is one of them. The misinformation spread, in my case, was nothing too drastic, and I know that the journalist did not intend to deceive anyone. It was simply an oversimplification of information—such an oversimplification, in fact, that the information presented actually became misinformation. [...]

THIS! ^



Seriously, that last part, about misinformation.  Its *amazing* what a journalist will do with *anything* you say in an "interview" to make an interesting "story."  Once its away from your view, you have almost zero control of the message. Very few journos, due to tight deadlines or their belief that they know they got the story 100% "right" will even bother to send you their draft for accuracy review.

I was once interviewed for a county-wide newspaper when I was the commander of a unit in MI Wing.  The journalist and I met for coffee at a local Big Boy restaurant (mmmm, Big Boy...) and we had a nice hour long chat about CAP.  At one point, he said something like "Help me understand what the local CAP cadet units are all about.. Is it like the Air Force?"

I (stupidly) said "Well, and I wouldn't print this, but to some extent, think of the Cadet Program like Boy Scouts with schnazzy uniforms.." and we laughed and he said "Yeah, I wouldn't exactly say that.." and we moved on.

The article came out a week or two later, and there it is: "In describing the cadet program, Captain Ninness said 'Its like Boy Scouts with schnazzy uniforms.'." 

I was like "Holy crap, he PRINTED that?" 

My email filled with messages from fellow officers in my group, congratulating me on being a complete bonehead.   One even said "Welcome to the club, dude.  You won't say that again, will you?"  (It was embarrassing, but not a show stopper.. still, I'm trying to remember who was my group commander at the time.. I think General Courter had already handed over the group to someone else, but in any event, I got crap at the next commander's call, and I think the Wing PAO even called me to thank me for being the one to say something stupid to the media instead of him. )

Lesson learned: Don't want it in there? Don't say it.  Context or otherwise.  Don't let 'em take "background" pictures of something that isn't quite right, cuz when it hits the paper, even though John Q. Public won't know any different, others will. And it won't be "background."

Several years later, right after 9/11 when that kid slammed a 172 into a multi-story building in Tampa, I got a call from my wing administrator that the local TV news folks wanted to talk to someone from Civil Air Patrol about it.  They'd gone to the local aviation college to talk to the "experts" on aviation, they wanted someone on camera who could talk about young people and aviation (expert or otherwise, right?)  Since I happened to work about 500m across the runway from the college, I got the hot button to talk to the media. (I happened to have a flight suit in my car, my hair was in regs, and had even shaved that day. Win!)

During the interview, the reporter kept trying to lead me to say that allowing 16 year old kids to fly planes was patently unsafe and should be banned by Congress, the FAA, the PTA and your local fire department. I wasn't going to let her go there.  I said things like "For the most part, flying is as safe for anybody as driving a car. And nobody seems to question a 16 year old with a driver's license and mom's Buick."  That night, there was my mug on local TV and they weren't able to edit my comments into something that sounded like kids should never be allowed near aircraft.  (Whew!)

[ColonelJack]

As a broadcast journalist of 35 years' experience, I was ready to be offended at Darin's comment about what we would do to make an interesting story, but as I re-read it I realized ... he's absolutely right.

Not that I am defending incompetence, or anything like that ... but in that business it's all about getting the largest number of viewers or readers to pay attention to what you're saying.  So if a ho-hum story gets "sensationalized" in some way, that's the reason.  My evening newscast in west Georgia competes with stations out of Atlanta and Columbus, and while I will never skew a story just for ratings (or to enhance someone's agenda -- even my own), I do want to present the news in such a way as to convince local viewers to stay tuned to channel 33, not switch to 2, 5, 9, 11, etc.

Correct also is the comment that we don't send drafts to those involved in the story for review -- in television it's because we don't have time and because we have to set our own standards.  (At least it's so at my station.)

Jack

[Briski]

It's interesting that we in the US are so stuck on the appearance of accurate reporting. In many other countries, the left wingers read the left wing newspaper, and the right wingers read the right wing newspaper. They want to read what they want to hear.

The US is weird in that we expect our media to be unbiased. At the very least, the average American becomes impassioned when a given news source is biased against his or her stance or mindset. Even though we all know that there isn't a human on earth who is completely free of bias.

Btw, NIN, I appreciate the effort you put forth in quoting my post, using elipses to indicate that there was more to my post than the excerpts you quoted. Ironically apropos, given the topic at hand. 

[NIN]

As a broadcast journalist of 35 years' experience, I was ready to be offended at Darin's comment about what we would do to make an interesting story, but as I re-read it I realized ... he's absolutely right.

Thanks Jack. Glad I did it right

Seriously, though, there is a difference between a "journalist" and a "newsreader" (I think that term is still in use in the UK).  I watch TV, I want to see something _interesting_, not some talking head droning at the camera.

(mind you: my former major in college was mass communications, specifically radio & TV.  I am "school trained," sort of, in these subjects, even though I was always a "production" not "editorial" guy.)

I read the paper, I want to read a good story, not a bland recitation of the facts.  I certainly don't begrudge a journalist the opportunity to entertain us with his/her wordsmithing and presentation of factual information.  Thats "good journalism."

It was solely my fault for saying something to the writer that I expected was something to give him a clearer understanding of the program so he could write a better, more accurate story, and instead wound up as a part of the story.  Lesson learned, the hard way.

Thankfully, it was a little county paper, not the Detroit News where my gaffe would be visible in someone's archives for the next 100 years.

Jackie: Yeah, I was trying to quote the relevant parts for brevity (me? brevity? Ha!). Sometimes I get it right, sometimes I make it worse.  I'm glad I don't get paid to write, I'd be a lot more broke than I am now.