To Fly or Not to Fly

This article describes the mass confusion and grounding in regards to American Airlines. Recently, because of improper inspections, American has grounded over 1,000 flights! That displaces people all over the country, and moreover, bars them from getting where they need to go. Though this article has a lighthearted appeal to it, I heard a different side of the story.
In one of my classes, COMM 301, our TA gives a recent news breakdown of current events. The flight groundation was today's topic. Where the Times article notes the need for an inspection "and in some cases reattach wiring bundles in the wheel wells of its 300-plane fleet." Uh...did you say reattaching wiring in the wheels? The story then goes on to describe how the Federal Aviation Administration allows most maintainance and work to be done by individual companies, and the FAA works to audit these reports. What I was told in my other class was that the airlines actually were inspected, and failed inspection, from the FAA. Nonetheless, these planes were flown and used. Um...anyone want to take a trip?
This difference in media outlook relates to two important science communication topics: agenda setting and framing. First, the media broke the story, put it on the front page and applied it to thousands of Americans who use this airline. This satisfies both the "Personal relevance" and "Prominence" aspects of Agenda saying. Basically, they wanted to talk about it, so now we (well, at least my TA and I) are talking about it. Second, you can see the issue has been framed differently. Whereas my TA framed it as a appauling neglect and wrongdoing, the Times tries to show the lighter side of the issue. They even quote passangers to make it sound more uplifting, " 'It's a 100 percent inconvenience,' Ms. Creamer said. 'But the airline has been helpful.' ” HELLO LADY, you just almost got put on a plane that may or may not land. She can get back on her plane, I think I'll drive...