Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

upgrd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 243 posts

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#161

Post by blablabla123 »

pudquick wrote: post #62

Yes, it's unfortunate that the flight attendant lied in this situation. However, it would have been impossible for the pilot to verify this - even if the author showed him the camera. Since the author was willing to 'prove' it, it had to be a digital camera - which the author could have very easily used the built-in delete function to remove all photos but one (or be a sneaky terrorist and swap SD cards). In addition…

>However, it would have been impossible for the pilot to verify this

The OP could have added the guy behind him who also took photos into the conversation. But I agree, the pilot was right to take him off the plane without any further information.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#162

Post by jimzvz »

mootothemax wrote: post #116
rurounijones wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You were not kicked off for taking pictures. You were kicked off for acting odd." Not even odd, slightly odd which is now apparently grounds for getting kicked off an airliner. The terrorists have won a great victory if acting slightly odd is enough to terrify an airline company into kicking a passenger off a plane.

The terrorists have won a great victory if acting slightly odd is enough to terrify an airline company into kicking a passenger off a plane. This isn't about terrorism. It's about a flight attendant taking exception to a passenger, and owing to what he later said and how he behaved, believing that he could develop into a problem on a long-haul flight. Was it a good call? Probably not, given the author's flight histor…

If flight attendants got everybody that they didn't like kicked off flights, it would seem[1] that there would be barely anyone flying.

If I pay for a service and it isn't delivered there better be a damn good reason. A lie about me doing something that I wasn't or me stating that I am not a terrorist are not good reasons.

[1]http://longhaulflightattendants.tumblr.com/

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#163

Post by biot »

My take on this:

  "Naturally, the FA's warning bothered me and I felt the need
   to explain myself."
Why? The only appropriate response to being informed that you are not permitted to take pictures in a non-public space is "I understand" or simply "Okay". No explanation is necessary as it won't change the rule that the flight attendant is likely obligated to enforce. However, the author feels compelled to justify himself rather than just let it be by saying:

  "I want you to understand why I was taking pictures. I hope you
   didn't think I was a terrorist. Here is my business card
   [offering her one]. I write about United Airlines on an
   almost-daily basis and the folks at United in Chicago are even
   aware of my blog."
This is quite ambiguous. The flight attendant is probably thinking "Oh great, here's some critic who is going to scrutinize and complain about everything I do and then write about it publicly. If he's so notorious that the guys in Chicago are aware of him, he must be bad news. Is he telling me this to try and con me into letting him take more pictures? Some disgruntled self-important writer is the last thing I need...". Imagine how the response might have been different had he said:

  "Sorry about taking that picture. I just want to say that I love
   United and everything you guys do. I'm really excited about being
   in BusinessFirst class on this new aircraft and wanted to capture
   the moment. Thanks for letting me know about the photography
   restriction, though. I respect that and won't take another
   picture."
But again, that whole exchange should never have happened. Then later, this gem of a sentence:

  "Me: That's a lie, captain."
Ouch. Now the only way to get your way is for both the captain and the flight attendant to lose face and admit that, yes, it was a lie. What was he expecting? That the captain brings the flight attendant over and asks her "Did you lie?" where she responds "Yes, Captain, I lied about this passenger taking additional pictures because I was afraid that he might write about a negative experience with me." I could go on with how the conversation with the captain should have gone, using face-saving phrases like "she may have been mistaken" and such, but at that point the battle was long since lost.

None of this excuses the flight attendant's alleged retaliatory action. However, having the situation escalate to that point could easily have been avoided.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#164

Post by Terretta »

No other comments in this thread make this point, so I'll bring it up. While the passenger should not have been booted off, he was absolutely in the wrong but only based on what he told the crew.

Here is the photo policy:

http://cdn-img1.upgrd.com/featured/united-photo-limits.png

It says photography is strictly prohibited of aircraft equipment, and if not of aircraft equipment, prohibited unless of "personal events".

His explanation:

"I want you to understand why I was taking pictures. I hope you didn't think I was a terrorist. Here is my business card [offering her one]. I write about United Airlines on an almost-daily basis and the folks at United in Chicago are even aware of my blog."

This falls outside of personal use. This is professional use, and therefore absolutely outside of the personal events category. Taking pictures under his business card and related to his blog is strictly prohibited, and his arguing means he was arguing with the rules that were shown to him by the FA before he began arguing.

Aside from being absolutely in violation of the rules, perhaps this had nothing to do with "I am not a terrorist"; perhaps the FA and captain were disinterested in having their entire route evaluated and blogged about.

No idea what United will say in response. And frankly, I am shocked to be siding with United. But in this case, they handed him a printed rule, and he chose to explain himself in a way that put him in violation of it, and took himself out of the regular passenger category.

In their shoes, I'd point out that by his own explanation, he was wilfully breaking the rules.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#165

Post by argonaut »

intenex wrote: post #132
pudquick wrote: post #62

Yes, it's unfortunate that the flight attendant lied in this situation. However, it would have been impossible for the pilot to verify this - even if the author showed him the camera. Since the author was willing to 'prove' it, it had to be a digital camera - which the author could have very easily used the built-in delete function to remove all photos but one (or be a sneaky terrorist and swap SD cards). In addition…

Except, as others have pointed out, it wasn't odd at all. It's actually an idiom and an absolutely common response in a photographic context. http://goo.gl/CnV1s Moreover, it was probably just so incredulous to the blogger that there would be any chance at all that anyone would imagine he'd be a terrorist because he was taking pictures of the little monitor in the seat in front of him that it didn't even cross his mi…

I can't say that I agree with you that it's an idiom (well, because I've certainly never heard of it). It's a flat out socially weird thing to declare that you're not a terrorist. Social customs are hard to pin down, but if a passenger sitting next to me told the flight attendant that he wasn't a terrorist after the attendant told him to stop taking pictures (or to put away his cellphone), I would think of him as very odd.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#166

Post by swah »

Terretta wrote: post #164

No other comments in this thread make this point, so I'll bring it up. While the passenger should not have been booted off, he was absolutely in the wrong but only based on what he told the crew . Here is the photo policy: http://cdn-img1.upgrd.com/featured/united-photo-limits.png It says photography is strictly prohibited of aircraft equipment, and if not of aircraft equipment, prohibited unless of "personal events"…

They should have made that clear, that his job was exactly the problem.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#167

Post by Anechoic »

Terretta wrote: post #164

No other comments in this thread make this point, so I'll bring it up. While the passenger should not have been booted off, he was absolutely in the wrong but only based on what he told the crew . Here is the photo policy: http://cdn-img1.upgrd.com/featured/united-photo-limits.png It says photography is strictly prohibited of aircraft equipment, and if not of aircraft equipment, prohibited unless of "personal events"…

In their shoes, I'd point out that by his own explanation, he was wilfully breaking the rules.

He took one picture when he was unaware of the rule. Once informed of the rule, he immediately stopped. How is that "willfuly breaking the rules"?

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#168

Post by larsmak »

pudquick wrote: post #62

Yes, it's unfortunate that the flight attendant lied in this situation. However, it would have been impossible for the pilot to verify this - even if the author showed him the camera. Since the author was willing to 'prove' it, it had to be a digital camera - which the author could have very easily used the built-in delete function to remove all photos but one (or be a sneaky terrorist and swap SD cards). In addition…

"You were not kicked off for taking pictures. You were kicked off for acting odd."

I agree - you can come a long way by just saying "My apologies, I dit not know that", give a short smile and look another way. Inside you might mean something different, and you can silently ponder on what a jerk the opposite person is.. but you need to let the opposite person feel that he/she is in control - especially it it's their job to stay in control.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#169

Post by bambax »

> maybe I should never used the word terrorist in my explanation

That's obviously the problem. When I read he said he wasn't a terrorist I thought "uh-oh, this isn't going to end well".

The US have this very strange custom of having "forbidden words" -- words that can't be said on TV and/or words that can't be said in an ordinary conversation. Those words are alluded-to with their initial: F-word, S-word, N-word, etc.

The T-word needs to be added to that list.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#170

Post by jfoster »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #54
sdoering wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why, if this means, you stay on the plane, you win. But nobody looses his/her face. So wining, without anyone losing, what is so wrong? Everything else (and I sadly, really often react that way) is the little child in a sand-pit: "But he started it" kind of argument. Not mature, not civilized, just childish - the way or societies more and more seem to become imho.

There is nothing civilized about failing to point out that the claim "he took more pictures" is a lie. There is nothing civilized about abuse of power. There is nothing civilized in accepting it. But the real WTF is: how would agreeing to be led off the plane have resulted in him staying on it? His fate was sealed when he explained his picture to the FA and she had a 'nam flashback, or whatever the fuck caused this;…

Depends on your definition of "a lie" but in any case, accusations of lying are confrontational. It's far better to at least appear to be assuming the best in others by framing it as a miscommunication.
Post reply on HN