| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/20/2012 07:57:22 PM · #1 |
go get some hot chocolate, this one is going to take some time to get through. and be forewarned, you'll probably want some tissues and bourbon nearby for when you finish.
Avalanche!
|
|
|
|
12/20/2012 08:28:18 PM · #2 |
| good god. i read the first section an got claustrophobic. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 08:37:43 PM · #3 |
| Read that at work today (it was a slow day, the Times sent me a teaser...) Very dramatic. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 08:38:35 PM · #4 |
| Good timing. I am going skiing in a few weeks. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 12:41:56 AM · #5 |
| I've skied Seventh Heaven many times, though not the back country. Very well written and put together. If this is the future of journalism on the web, I want more! |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 02:08:42 AM · #6 |
| It was a very humanizing and poignant article, and the multimedia did a great job of illustrating things. But it's very high on hyperbole and is seemingly written by somebody outside the scene who fails to appreciate much of this event and the culture surrounding it, and it fails to address the real issue of the incident: Why industry professionals who were experienced failed to understand the conditions. This incident should be viewed as a case study for pitfalls in condition estimation by individuals, but that is all left out. I much prefer Outside Magazine's write up by Megan Michelson, one of the skiers involved for these reasons. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 07:51:56 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
and it fails to address the real issue of the incident: Why industry professionals who were experienced failed to understand the conditions. This incident should be viewed as a case study for pitfalls in condition estimation by individuals, but that is all left out. I much prefer Outside Magazine's write up by Megan Michelson, one of the skiers involved for these reasons. |
not sure if you read the whole thing but the ending did make note of what you are talking about. it didn't harp on it but it did point out that the warnings were ignored. It also pointed out the cause of death for the victims, and it wasn't simple asphyxiation, the bodies were literally broken by the snow.
i haven't skied in years and while i wasn't at the level these skiers thus wouldn't be traversing back country slopes it was still eye opening for me. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 08:24:31 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
not sure if you read the whole thing but the ending did make note of what you are talking about. it didn't harp on it but it did point out that the warnings were ignored. It also pointed out the cause of death for the victims, and it wasn't simple asphyxiation, the bodies were literally broken by the snow.
i haven't skied in years and while i wasn't at the level these skiers thus wouldn't be traversing back country slopes it was still eye opening for me. |
I did read the whole thing, and the extent of the analysis I saw was rhetorical questions and essentially painting them as hungry thrillseekers, which, frankly, is insulting to the whole ordeal and those involved. The same tone was used earlier in describing things, with vague descriptions of the sport and safety protocol. The difference between the two is one is intended for an audience that participates, and one is not. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.
ETA: It's the same reason that Accidents in North American Mountaineering- the publication isn't to glorify or to entertain, it's to inform about safety protocol and how to avoid becoming newsworthy.
And if that article made you feel claustrophobic, check your pants before watching this. The video is not for the squeamish.
Message edited by author 2012-12-21 08:35:23. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 09:49:39 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
I did read the whole thing, and the extent of the analysis I saw was rhetorical questions and essentially painting them as hungry thrillseekers, which, frankly, is insulting to the whole ordeal and those involved. The same tone was used earlier in describing things, with vague descriptions of the sport and safety protocol. The difference between the two is one is intended for an audience that participates, and one is not. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose. |
i didn't come away with that impression at all. i appreciate your posting the link to the Outside Magazine article, as i thought its unique, insider's view and psychological insights to the incident complemented the human backstory that the NYTimes articled offered. while it might seem cold and callous, the fact remains that this tragedy was of their own making, and one likely to replay itself as people push further and further into uncharted, uncontrolled, unprotected areas.
i'll agree with doc, though, with my overall impression of the NYTimes article. i found it well-researched, well-written, and the multi-media presentation was top-notch. we've all heard about avalanches, especially ones like this, but this article provides the lay-skier and non-skier a much more complete view as to what actually occurs.
and i can't imagine anyone, after reading either account, going out there without an airbag, let alone a beacon. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 10:09:39 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Very well written and put together. If this is the future of journalism on the web, I want more! |
thought so too, it was a very engaging presentation as well, one that i hope get more play, especially now that we all have devices that can handle such media. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 10:32:21 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
It was a very humanizing and poignant article, and the multimedia did a great job of illustrating things. But it's very high on hyperbole and is seemingly written by somebody outside the scene who fails to appreciate much of this event and the culture surrounding it, and it fails to address the real issue of the incident: Why industry professionals who were experienced failed to understand the conditions. This incident should be viewed as a case study for pitfalls in condition estimation by individuals, but that is all left out. I much prefer Outside Magazine's write up by Megan Michelson, one of the skiers involved for these reasons. |
I think they hit on it pretty good: the psychological dynamic of a large group. Later many people said they were uneasy about the conditions but didn't want to go against the group. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 11:19:31 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Very well written and put together. If this is the future of journalism on the web, I want more! |
thought so too, it was a very engaging presentation as well, one that i hope get more play, especially now that we all have devices that can handle such media. |
Apparently I don't; it's showing me blank white pages. What am I missing, software/hardware wise, to make it display? |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 11:30:06 AM · #13 |
| That's odd. Works fine on both IE and the iPad for me. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 12:32:44 PM · #14 |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 12:44:36 PM · #15 |
Working okay here on my Mac using Safari browser. Thanks Skip for posting this link- very well done presentation! Such a sad thing :(
I've done a lot of winter mountaineering in the area this incident happened in- mostly on snowshoe. In fact one time in nearby Leavenworth I got buried in several feet of snow myself when a snow cave we were digging to spend the night in caved in on me. I was probably only 3-5 feet under, but knew from training the snow would set around me almost instantly so managed to cup my hands around my face for an air pocket before I suddenly couldn't move at all. It only took a couple of minutes before I could feel a shovel hit my leg and shortly after several sets of gloved hands were pulling snow from my face- but man that time seemed like an eternity!
I've not been caught in an avalanche, but have heard and seen them going off around me and they can be very scary. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 01:20:13 PM · #16 |
| Works fine on IE. It's a Chrome issue I guess. Helluva multimedia format. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 02:33:51 PM · #17 |
Chrome worked fine for me. It was a sobering article for sure.
|
|
|
|
12/21/2012 02:35:54 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by NathanWert:
Chrome worked fine for me. It was a sobering article for sure. |
Hrmm... obviously I have the required drivers etc, so what's stopping chrome from running this?
ETA: Got it! It's "Ghostery", the extension in Chrome that stops people from tracking me... I disable Ghostery and the article displays fine.
Message edited by author 2012-12-21 14:42:13. |
|
|
|
12/21/2012 08:16:43 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think they hit on it pretty good: the psychological dynamic of a large group. Later many people said they were uneasy about the conditions but didn't want to go against the group. |
But the thing is that it's not just because it's a large group, there's more to it than that, of which the number was just another piece. There's a reason avalanche training courses are getting revamped in recent years.
And agreed, Skip, this was of their own making, which is why it's important for users of such resources to understand how these situations get made. But it's also important to note that there are also individuals who get caught in avalanches or rockfall which are of the objective nature. The fallacious thinking there is typically more of the order that objective dangers can be eliminated, whereas they can only be mitigated.
But I don't want to digress too far here or give the wrong idea- It really was a well presented, engaging and interesting read, I'm really just nitpicking ;) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/11/2025 07:56:44 PM EDT.
