Aviation Accidents, Safety and Disasters

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Theater

      The Shakespearean Tall Tale That Shaped How We See Starlings

      by

      Researchers debunked a long-repeated yarn that the common birds owe their North American beginnings to a 19th-century lover of the Bard. Maybe this ubiquitous bird’s story is ready for a reboot.In 1890, a mustachioed eccentric named Eugene Schieffelin released a few dozen European starlings into New York City. His supposed goal? Introduce all the bird species mentioned in William Shakespeare’s plays to America.More than a century later, the European starling is one of the most plentiful bird species in North America. Something like 85 million starlings inhabit this continent, from Alaska and Newfoundland all the way to Mexico. The animals are gorgeous, with polka-dot feather patterns and a purply-green sheen. They fill the skies in great numbers, flying in synchronized patterns called murmurations.But they are also considered a pest, said to spread disease to livestock and cause $800 million worth of agricultural damage each year. The species is believed to take over their nesting cavities, leading to population declines.Add it all up, and it makes one heck of a story about how even the tiniest of actions can trigger profound consequences. The butterfly effect, there for all to see in every roadside murmuration. A starling flaps its wings in Central Park, and around 130 years later, a woodpecker loses its nest and a dairy farmer loses their livelihood.“If true, it would suggest that a long-dead dramatist totally reshaped the ecosystem of a foreign continent, which is a fascinating connection between literature and science,” said John MacNeill Miller, an assistant professor of English at Allegheny College in Pennsylvania.However, Dr. MacNeill and a Lauren Fugate, a student who worked with him, recently concluded that crucial parts of the story are not true. And that made them wonder: What else have scientists and naturalists gotten wrong about the European starling’s narrative? Is there more to this bird known mostly as an invasive pest?The Bird and the Bard-LoverThree starlings collected in Central Park, including, from left, two juveniles collected in 1892 and an adult collected in 1890, in the American Museum of Natural History’s historical collection.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesFeathers of one of the European starling study skins from 1890. The museum’s starling collection includes specimens from their native, as well as introduced, range.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesDr. Miller has long been fascinated by the tale of Eugene Schieffelin. But there was a problem with the narrative.“In all the places that I had seen this story before,” he said, “I never saw a single reliable source from the time period when this supposedly happened.”So he and Ms. Fugate, started digging through archives and databases for any link between the Bard-lover and the bird. According to their findings, which were published in the journal Environmental Humanities in November, Schieffelin did release 40 pairs of European starlings into New York City twice in the springs of 1890 and 1891. But Ms. Fugate and Dr. Miller failed to find evidence that Schieffelin was the Shakespeare superfan he has been made out to be.They found in an essay collection published in 1948 that Edwin Way Teale, a Pulitzer Prize-winning nature writer, was the first to link the two. He referred to Schieffelin’s “curious hobby” of introducing “all the birds mentioned in the works of William Shakespeare.”Determined to find the source for Teale’s claim, Dr. Miller drove to the University of Connecticut to sort through a collection of Teale’s archives. (He died in 1980.) In a draft of the essay, Teale muses that perhaps Schieffelin had been influenced by a Shakespeare garden being started in Central Park around the same time — a botanical homage to the Bard that sought to nurture plants, not birds, mentioned in his plays.However, Teale got the timing wrong. The Shakespeare Garden — which you can still visit today — wasn’t planned until a decade after Schieffelin’s death, or 22 years after he first released starlings. Therefore, the garden could not have been a factor. The final version of the essay omitted the mention of the garden but left the connection between Schieffelin and Shakespeare. This statement of fact has since been repeated again and again without challenge in magazines, newspapers of record and birding websites.Several starlings in Fort Tryon park.Karsten Moran for The New York Times“Long story short, we concluded that this commonplace story is mostly fictional,” Dr. Miller said.Dr. Miller and Ms. Fugate also question whether today’s birds are uniquely descended from Schieffelin’s flocks, as is often parroted. Numerous records exist of earlier European starling introductions, starting in 1872, to locations including New York City, Ohio and even as far away as Oregon. Such releases were part of a movement at the time known as “acclimatization” where people deliberately experimented with transplanting species into new areas, either to see how they would adapt or because those species were seen as beneficial in some way.Some tellings of the Schieffelin starling origin story note these earlier introductions but suggest that those birds failed to survive. However, wild starlings were caught in Massachusetts in 1876, far from any of the documented introductions. Likewise, there is a record of wild starlings in New Jersey in 1884. And who knows how many birds truly survived in nature beyond human notice, the researchers argue.“From the perspective of an invasion biologist, most invasions come from multiple introductions,” said Natalie Hofmeister, a doctoral candidate at Cornell University.In 2019, Ms. Hofmeister published a study in the journal Molecular Ecology of the European starling’s genetic variation across North America. If all the birds came from Schieffelin’s small flock, then you’d expect to see a tight genetic bottleneck in the data. Likewise, if the other, earlier introductions had been successful, that should have injected more diversity into the results. But her findings landed somewhere in between.“It does seem like there’s a lot of ambiguity as to whether or not the New York birds were really the beginning of the starlings’ expansion,” said Ms. Hofmeister, who has a follow-up study in the works.Hell Is Empty and All the Starlings Are HereA scavenging starling near the southwest entrance to Central Park. Something like 85 million starlings inhabit North America — they are one of the most plentiful bird species on the continent.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesDr. Miller and Ms. Fugate also take issue with the depiction of starlings as biological terrors. As evidence, they point to a well-regarded study from 2003 that found out of 27 native cavity-nesting birds, only one showed hints of decline that might be attributed to the introduction of starlings: the small woodpeckers known as yellow-bellied sapsuckers.Nicole Michel, director of quantitative science for the National Audubon Society, sees it differently. It’s her job to drill down into bird population data. And she says looking for declines as a result of any one variable sets “too high of a bar.”“There are many factors out there that we know are impacting birds — cats, building collisions, pesticides,” she said. “And yet it’s very difficult to determine population level impacts.”She added: “So do starlings affect other birds? Definitely. Are they the only ones that affect other birds? No.”Nearly three billion birds have disappeared from North America since 1970. The European starlings here are counted among them, actually, with an estimated decline of 49 percent over the same time frame. (Starlings are also “declining rapidly” in Europe.)Even on the downswing, with about 85 million animals, starlings are bound to create an impact. The more likely scenario is that scientists don’t know enough to see the effects of starlings, said Daniel Simberloff, a biologist at the University of Tennessee.“We have no idea what its real impact is on insect populations, for example,” said Dr. Simberloff, who is also the editor of the journal Biological Invasions. Nor do scientists know much about more subtle but no less important impacts, such as the way starlings may affect how nutrients cycle through an ecosystem, he said.Anti-perching spikes are used to discourage birds, including starlings, from resting near the runways and taxiways at LaGuardia Airport.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesStarlings are believed to threaten native birds by taking over their nesting cavities, leading to population declines.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesOne factor that’s not subtle is the way European starlings descend on feedlots and dairy farms by the tens to hundreds of thousands. Starlings usually eat insects during the winter, but when livestock feed is available, they’ll pick through it for steam-flaked corn, which is higher in protein and fiber than other parts of the feed. And when that many birds are taking the M&Ms out of the trail mix, so to speak, it can affect growth and milk production in cows and cost dairy farmers millions of dollars, the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates.The birds are also suspected of transmitting diseases to livestock, though proving how this happens exactly has been as slippery as deciphering the impacts on native birds. While feedlots with more starlings had higher incidences of antibiotic resistant E. coli, killing more than 70 percent of the starling flock did not change how much E. coli the cows had. It’s also unclear if starlings are bringing microbes into the feedlots or simply spreading microbes that are already there.A research economist for the U.S.D.A.’s National Wildlife Research Center, Stephanie Shwiff has seen how starlings congregate at dairy lots firsthand and, she said, it is “impressive.” But as she tallies up losses to the agricultural sector, she sees no redemptive arc for these birds — only financial harm.“A lot of producers know exactly the damage that the birds are doing, but they have this overwhelming sense that it’s just the cost of doing business,” Dr. Shwiff said. She said blueberry farmers and wine grape vineyards also get slammed: “They have an almost defeated attitude.”To help farmers and livestock owners, the U.S.D.A.’s Wildlife Services program helps disperse, relocate or eradicate starlings. In 2020 alone, the program shooed away nearly eight million European starlings, and killed another 790,128 of them. A vast majority of these animals were killed with a poison invented specifically for them called DRC-1339, or Starlicide.Starlings and Arrows of Outrageous FortuneJoan Berry Hale of Stockbridge, Ga., a survivor of a 1960 Eastern Airlines plane crash that was the result of a bird strike.Audra Melton for The New York TimesWhile starlings’ impact on native birds is still debated, no one can question the effect they’ve had on American aviation. Just ask Joan Berry Hale.On Oct. 4, 1960, Ms. Hale was working as a flight attendant for Eastern Airlines when the Lockheed L-188 Electra she was crewing scared a flock of starlings as it took off from Boston en route to Philadelphia.“I could see out the window in the back, and I saw all these black birds fly by,” said Ms. Hale, now 85. The plane’s propellers ingested hundreds of starlings, which disturbed the engines and forced the craft to pitch left and crash nose first into the bay. “They didn’t find the front-end crew until they pulled the nose up out of the mud the next day,” she recalled.Of the 72 people on board, only 10 survived. Most were severely injured, but Ms. Hale emerged unscathed and helped survivors exit the wreckage, put on life preservers and board rescue boats.The Electra crash remains the deadliest accident resulting from a bird strike in world history. It was also a turning point in aviation safety.“That was the crash that started it all,” said Carla Dove, program manager for the Smithsonian Institution’s Feather Identification Lab, which was created in response to the Electra accident.Since its formation, the Feather Identification Lab has worked with the Federal Aviation Administration to make air travel safer. Using the Smithsonian’s vast collection of feathers, Dr. Dove and other experts can take a piece of “snarge,” what they call bits of bird that have gone through a jet engine, and figure out which species it belonged to. Then, airport managers and wildlife biologists can work together to make the facilities less attractive to those species.For starlings, says Richard Dolbeer, a science adviser for the U.S.D.A.’s Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, something as simple as letting the grass grow can discourage the birds from landing. Spacing out trees also cuts down on large, communal overnight roosts that might keep the animals near an airport.This Great Breach in the Starling’s Abused NatureRyan Kronenbitter, the operations group supervisor for the team at LaGuardia Airport that helps manage wildlife.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesBut while starlings have caused plenty of wreckage to agriculture and aviation, the birds may have some admirable qualities that are typically overlooked.Dr. Simberloff, a pioneer in the field of invasion biology, said that it was a great tragedy that starlings had been introduced, but that some of the rhetoric around them is overblown.“You see a lot of these popular papers that talk about it as one of the great scourges of North America,” Dr. Simberloff said of starlings. “And they don’t seem to be that.”Dr. Dolbeer, who is also an ornithologist, said he had “great admiration for starlings because they are so adaptable.” He’s also fascinated by the way starlings can intermingle and even roost with native species, such as red-winged blackbirds. “It’s sort of like the analogy of America being a melting pot, with all the people coming in and gluing together,” he said.Dr. Simberloff said his daughter rescued a starling and raised it up from a chick. “It knows its name very clearly,” and will sometimes say it — Blue — when prompted, he said.There may even be reasons to further consider the birds’ ecological impact. The 2003 paper on starling dominance found three species of woodpeckers experienced population increases since the European birds arrived, although it does not make a case for causation. And Ms. Fugate and Dr. Miller point to a 1915 study by U.S.D.A. scientists who concluded that starlings gobbled up fewer crops and ate more crop pests than native species.And while his research has made the Shakespearean starling legend seem well and truly dead, the question of how to view the European starling these days seems very much to depend on whom you ask.After more than 60 years, Ms. Hale thinks about the crash anytime she sees a large flock of birds. So many innocent people lost their lives, and she’ll never forget the cold bite of the water. Ultimately, she thinks she became a better person because of the accident.And while she “doesn’t care much for those pesky birds,” she also doesn’t blame the European starling. “It wasn’t their fault,” Ms. Hale said. “That’s just nature.”A starling flaps its wings in Central Park, and a life changes course in the frigid waters of Boston Harbor.A starling undeterred by an anti-perching device on a lamppost at LaGuardia.Karsten Moran for The New York Times More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Movies

      Alec Baldwin Seeks to Avoid Liability in Fatal ‘Rust’ Shooting

      by

      In an arbitration demand against his fellow producers on the film, he denied culpability in the killing of a cinematographer and said he should not be held financially responsible.Alec Baldwin gave his most detailed account yet of fatally shooting a cinematographer on the set of the film “Rust” last year in an arbitration demand that his lawyers filed Friday against his fellow producers, claiming that his contract protected him from financial responsibility in her death and seeking coverage of his legal fees.Mr. Baldwin has been named in several lawsuits seeking damages since he shot and killed the cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, on Oct. 21 in New Mexico while practicing for a scene that required him to draw a gun. The filing said that he was not responsible for her death, since he had been assured that the gun did not contain any live ammunition and because he was not responsible for checking the ammunition or for firearm safety on the set.The filing provided new details of Mr. Baldwin’s role as a producer of “Rust,” a production some former crew members claimed in lawsuits had sacrificed safety by cutting costs. While Mr. Baldwin was involved in creative matters, the filing said, others had authority over hiring and budgets. Mr. Baldwin was to be paid $250,000 to star in the movie and act as a producer, it said, but he gave back $100,000 as an “investment” in the film.And the filing contained text messages that Mr. Baldwin had exchanged with Matthew Hutchins, the widower of the slain cinematographer, which showed how their relationship had deteriorated over time — from mutual expressions of condolence and support in the immediate aftermath of the shooting to the pointed wrongful-death lawsuit Mr. Hutchins filed against Mr. Baldwin this year. Brian Panish, a lawyer for Mr. Hutchins, said in a statement that Mr. Baldwin was trying to avoid accountability for his “reckless actions.” The filing provided a vivid account of the fatal shooting on the New Mexico film set, which took place after lunch as Mr. Baldwin rehearsed a scene inside a church in which his character, Harland Rust, is cornered and draws his gun.“Rust’s Colt COCKED quietly now …” the filing quotes the direction in the script, as his pursuers approach. Then, shortly after that: “Colts EXPLODING.”Ms. Hutchins told Mr. Baldwin how to position the gun, the filing said.“She directed Baldwin to hold the gun higher, to a point where it was directed toward her,” it said. “She was looking carefully at the monitor and then at Baldwin, and then back again, as she gave these instructions. In giving and following these instructions, Hutchins and Baldwin shared a core, vital belief: that the gun was ‘cold’ and contained no live rounds.”Mr. Baldwin then asked Ms. Hutchins if she wanted him to pull back the hammer, as the script instructed, and she said yes, the filing said.“Baldwin then pulled back the hammer, but not far enough to actually cock the gun,” it said. “When Baldwin let go of the hammer, the gun went off.”It went on to describe the confusion and horror after the shooting, as Ms. Hutchins was flown by helicopter to a hospital, where she was later pronounced dead. It was later, at the end of his interview with the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office, that Mr. Baldwin was shown a photograph of the projectile that had passed through Ms. Hutchins and then wounded the film’s director, Joel Souza, the filing said.What Happened on the Set of ‘Rust’What We Know: A gun that was being used as a prop by the actor Alec Baldwin on the set of the movie “Rust” went off, killing the film’s director of photography and wounding the director.Remembering the Victim: Halyna Hutchins was the movie’s director of cinematography.Baldwin’s Account: Mr. Baldwin spoke of the incident in an emotional ABC News interview, insisting he was not to blame in the fatal shooting.The Family Sues: Ms. Hutchins’s family has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit in New Mexico against crew members and producers.Denying Culpability: Mr. Baldwin, who has been named in the suit, has claimed that his contract protects him from financial responsibility in the death.“Baldwin recognized the object as a live bullet, and he finally began to comprehend what had transpired on the set of ‘Rust’ that day,” it said. “He was shocked.”In the filing, Baldwin’s lawyer, Luke Nikas, says a clause Mr. Baldwin and his company had signed in his contract with Rust Movie Productions L.L.C. means he bears no financial responsibility for legal fees or claims arising out of the death. The filing, with the JAMS private arbitration service, seeks to enforce the clause. The document names Rust Movie Productions L.L.C. and Ryan Smith, one of the other producers, as the respondents in the claim.“Someone is culpable for chambering the live round that led to this horrific tragedy, and it is someone other than Baldwin,” Mr. Nikas wrote in the claim, portraying Mr. Baldwin as a victim who trusted others to do their jobs and is haunted by Ms. Hutchins’s death. “This is a rare instance when the system broke down, and someone should be held legally culpable for the tragic consequences. That person is not Alec Baldwin.”Representatives of Rust Movie Productions L.L.C. and a lawyer for Mr. Smith did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Mr. Nikas described in the claim how, in the weeks after the fatal shooting, Mr. Baldwin had sought to persuade the cast and crew of “Rust” to finish the film to honor Ms. Hutchins, outlining a plan in which an insurance payout and the film’s profits would go to a settlement for Mr. Hutchins and the couple’s 9-year-old son.Shortly after the shooting, the filing said, Mr. Baldwin had breakfast in Santa Fe with Mr. Hutchins and his son. At the meeting, the filing said, “Hutchins hugged Baldwin and told him, ‘I guess we’re going to go through this together.’” Mr. Baldwin denied responsibility for the shooting in an ABC News interview in December with George Stephanopoulos. Matthew Hutchins, the widower of the slain cinematographer, would later say that the interview had made him “angry.”Jeff Neira/ABC via Getty ImagesBut their relationship, which continued through a series of texts and calls, broke down in the aftermath of a television interview Mr. Baldwin gave in December in which he denied responsibility for Ms. Hutchins’s death; Mr. Hutchins later filed a lawsuit against Mr. Baldwin and followed it by giving his own television interview, on NBC’s “Today” show in February, in which he described being angered by Mr. Baldwin’s deflection of blame. Although a number of crew members have described the set as unsafe, and several quit shortly before the fatal shooting, the filing said that Mr. Baldwin had not heard about or observed any safety problems on the set. In the filing, Mr. Baldwin sought to rebut several claims that Mr. Hutchins and some “Rust” crew members had made in lawsuits and in comments to the news media.Two lawsuits filed by crew members have claimed that Mr. Baldwin should have checked that the gun was safe to handle, even after he had received an assurance from the film’s first assistant director that it was.But the new filing said that during firearm training for the film, the movie’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, had told Mr. Baldwin that “it was her job to check the gun — not his.” That instruction was similar to what he had been told before, it said. (Asked for comment, a lawyer for Ms. Gutierrez-Reed said he was reviewing the filing.)“An actor cannot rule that a gun is safe,” the filing said. “That is the responsibility of other people on the set.”And while a lawsuit filed by Serge Svetnoy, the film’s gaffer, claimed that the movie’s producers had “declined requests for weapons training days,” and Ms. Gutierrez-Reed said that Mr. Baldwin had failed to attend “cross draw” training, Mr. Baldwin’s filing says that he had inquired about lessons about a month before he showed up on set and that he had training once he had arrived.The demand also claims that Mamie Mitchell, the script supervisor, had told Mr. Baldwin shortly after the fatal shooting, “You realize you’re not responsible for any of what happened in there, don’t you?” Ms. Mitchell is now suing Mr. Baldwin and other producers, blaming him for failing to check whether the gun he was handling was loaded. A lawyer for Ms. Mitchell, Gloria Allred, said in a statement, “Whatever Ms. Mitchell said immediately after the shooting when she was in a state of shock, and whatever Mr. Baldwin said immediately after the shooting, will be testified to at the trial in our civil case.” She said that the filing was “simply one more attempt by Mr. Baldwin to avoid responsibility for what he did.”In the filing, Mr. Baldwin and his lawyer go so far as to publish private text correspondence between Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Hutchins. The texts show Mr. Baldwin checking whether Mr. Hutchins still wanted to continue their conversations given the possible legal sensitivities, and Mr. Hutchins agreeing to continue communicating despite, according to the texts, the likely wishes of his legal advisers and press representative.Mr. Panish, the lawyer for Mr. Hutchins, called the inclusion of personal texts “irrelevant.”“Baldwin’s disclosure of personal texts with Matt Hutchins is irrelevant to his demand for arbitration and fails to demonstrate anything other than Hutchins’ dignity in his engagement with Baldwin,” he said in the statement. “It is shameful that Baldwin claims Hutchins’ actions in filing a wrongful-death lawsuit derailed the completion of ‘Rust.’ The only action that ended the film’s production was Baldwin’s killing of Halyna Hutchins.”The filing notes that Mr. Baldwin spoke at a memorial for Ms. Hutchins and that later Mr. Hutchins had shared a photograph of his son with Mr. Baldwin.Later, Mr. Hutchins filed a lawsuit against Mr. Baldwin, claiming that he had “recklessly shot and killed Halyna Hutchins on the set.” In an interview on NBC’s “Today” show, he said it was “absurd” for Mr. Baldwin to deny responsibility.When the family of Ms. Hutchins, left, filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Mr. Baldwin, they showed an animated re-creation of their version of the shooting.Chris Pizzello/Associated Press“Before Hutchins’s appearance on the ‘Today’ show, his interactions with Baldwin had only been polite, collaborative, and, at times, even warm,” Mr. Baldwin’s filing said.In the NBC interview, Mr. Hutchins spoke in emotional terms about seeing Mr. Baldwin discuss the shooting on television. “I was just so angry to see him talk about her death so publicly in such a detailed way,” Mr. Hutchins said in the NBC interview, “and then to not accept any responsibility after having just described killing her.”Nicole Sperling contributed reporting. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Downfall: The Case Against Boeing’ Review: Behind Two Fatal Crashes

      by

      This documentary on Netflix leaves the impression that the 737 Max’s entire existence is rotten.Regardless of any changes that Boeing made to the 737 Max, regardless of the clearance the revised plane received from the Federal Aviation Administration in late 2020, “Downfall: The Case Against Boeing” leaves the impression that its entire existence is a mistake: that it was cobbled together for the wrong reasons, to boost short-term stock gains and to avoid the time and costs of engineering a new, non-737 plane.The problems of the Max, and how its flawed design was implicated in the crashes of flights on Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines, killing hundreds, have been well-aired, and this documentary, directed by Rory Kennedy (“Last Days in Vietnam”), does not break news or break ground cinematically. (We don’t need to see filler footage of a reporter making calls.) But it is likely to leave viewers shaken, and it is always comprehensible, even in sequences that illustrate what the pilots saw in the cockpit. As the movie explains, in the first crash they were put in the position of having seconds to beat back a system that Boeing had never told pilots was on the aircraft.“Downfall” features interviewees who have gotten lost or abstracted in all the coverage, including the wife of the Lion Air captain, family members of the passenger victims and former Boeing employees. “How many times have you heard companies say, ‘We’re committed to excellence, we’re committed to safety, we’re committed to our customers’?” asks Andy Pasztor, who reported on the story for The Wall Street Journal, in summation. His verdict: “We should be skeptical.”Downfall: The Case Against BoeingRated PG-13. Upsetting material involving the crashes. Running time: 1 hour 29 minutes. Watch on Netflix. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Music

      Marília Mendonça, Brazilian Pop Singer, Dies in Plane Crash at 26

      by

      Ms. Mendonça, who was a social media sensation with millions of followers, was iconic in a type of Brazilian country music called sertanejo.Marília Mendonça, one of the most popular Brazilian pop singers who was known as “The Queen of Suffering” for her angst-filled ballads, was killed on Friday in a small plane crash in the southeastern state of Minas Gerais in Brazil. She was 26.The singer’s press office confirmed Ms. Mendonça’s death and said her producer, Henrique Ribeiro; her uncle who was also her assistant, Abicieli Silveira Dias Filho; and the pilot and co-pilot of the plane were also killed.The plane had been headed from the city of Goiania to Caratinga, where Ms. Mendonça was to have performed in a concert on Friday night. There was no immediate word on the circumstances leading up to the crash. The authorities said they were investigating.Ms. Mendonça was iconic in a type of Brazilian country music called sertanejo, a popular genre in Brazil. Her legions of fans found power in her song lyrics, which implored women to reject bad and abusive relationships, and told the stories of flawed characters.Ms. Mendonça was a social media sensation, with 7.8 million followers on Twitter, 22 million on YouTube and more than 38 million on Instagram.The plane had been headed to Caratinga, where Ms. Mendonça was to have performed on Friday night. Minas Gerais Civil Police, via Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBrazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, said on Twitter, “The whole country receives in shock the news of the death of the young country singer Marília Mendonça, one of the greatest artists of her generation, whom, with her unique voice, charisma and music won the affection and admiration of all of us.”Anitta, a funk singer popular in Brazil, said on Twitter: “I just found out. I can’t believe it.”Some in Brazil’s cosmopolitan circles had scorned Ms. Mendonça’s country ballads as “‘brega,’ or corny music,” NPR reported in 2019.“Sentimental or not, her songs offer a woman’s perspective that hasn’t been heard much in sertanejo’s machismo culture, and it’s made Mendonça the leading voice of a new subgenre called ‘feminejo’ — music by and for women,” NPR said.Ana Ionova contributed reporting. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Television

      How ‘Boeing’s Fatal Flaw’ Grounded the 737 Max and Exposed Failed Oversight

      by

      A new documentary by Frontline, in partnership with The New York Times, examines how competitive pressure, flawed design and problematic oversight of the Boeing jet led to two crashes that killed 346 people.A new documentary by Frontline, in partnership with The New York Times, investigates the Boeing 737 Max catastrophe, and will air on PBS on Tuesday, Sept. 14, and will be streaming on PBS.org/frontline, YouTube and in the PBS Video App.Ruth Fremson/The New York Times‘Boeing’s Fatal Flaw’Writer/director Thomas JenningsReporters David Gelles, James Glanz, Natalie Kitroeff and Jack NicasWatch the new documentary by Frontline, in partnership with The New York Times, on Tuesday, Sept. 14, on PBS and streaming at pbs.org/frontline, on YouTube and in the PBS Video App.Airplanes are designed to go up after takeoff, but that’s not what happened to Lion Air Flight 610 when it left Jakarta, Indonesia, in October 2018.“You don’t see planes diving on departure,” one Indonesian aviation expert said. And yet the Boeing 737 Max jet, piloted by an experienced crew, went into an irrecoverable nosedive minutes after takeoff. All 189 people on board were killed when it crashed into the Java Sea.Four months later, 157 people died when another 737 Max, operated as Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, plummeted to the earth, ringing new alarms about the aircraft. Days later, the jet was grounded.“Boeing’s Fatal Flaw,” a new documentary by Frontline, featuring reporting by The New York Times, investigates the causes of the two crashes and how a software system that was supposed to make the plane safer played a role in the catastrophes.The Boeing 737 Max began as a success story: The plane was the company’s best selling jet ever, with hundreds of billions of dollars in advance orders from airlines around the world. But our reporters’ investigation shows that, early on, the tale had all the elements of a tragedy in the making.Internal Boeing documents and interviews with former Federal Aviation Administration officials and congressional investigators reveal how competitive pressures influenced the efforts to bring the 737 Max to market. And The Times’s investigation details how an essential software system known as MCAS was implemented with insufficient oversight and inadequate pilot training.“Boeing’s Fatal Flaw” traces The Times’s investigation. Boeing declined to be interviewed for the film, but the documentary includes details from our reporters’ on-the-record interview with the company’s chief executive, Dave Calhoun. The film also features on-camera interviews with congressional investigators, aviation experts and family members of the passengers aboard the two fatal flights.You can watch on Tuesday, Sept. 14, on PBS and streaming at pbs.org/frontline, on YouTube and in the PBS Video App.Featured ReportersDavid Gelles writes the Corner Office column and other features for the Business section. Since joining The Times in 2013, he’s written about mergers and acquisitions, media, technology and more.James Glanz is a reporter on the Investigations desk. Before joining the desk, he spent nearly five years in Iraq as a correspondent and Baghdad bureau chief. On Sept. 11, 2001, he covered the collapse of the twin towers and, for two years, continued to report from ground zero. He has a Ph.D. in astrophysical sciences from Princeton.Natalie Kitroeff is a foreign correspondent covering Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. Before that, she was a business reporter writing about the economy for The Times. She also covered the California economy for The Los Angeles Times and reported on education for Bloomberg.Jack Nicas has covered technology for The New York Times since 2018. Before joining The Times, he spent seven years at The Wall Street Journal covering technology, aviation and national news.Producers Vanessa Fica and Kate McCormickSenior producer Frank KoughanExecutive producers for Left/Right Docs Ken Druckerman and Banks TarverExecutive producer of FRONTLINE Raney Aronson-RathFRONTLINE, U.S. television’s longest running investigative documentary series, explores the issues of our times through powerful storytelling. It is produced at GBH in Boston and is broadcast nationwide on PBS. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Television

      Plane Crash Complicates HBO Max Documentary on Diet-Inspired Church

      by

      On May 29, a single-pilot jet plane crashed into a lake near Nashville, killing all seven people on board. Among them were Gwen Shamblin Lara, a weight-loss guru and the founder of the Remnant Fellowship Church of Brentwood, Tenn., and her husband, William Lara, who was known as Joe and had once portrayed Tarzan in both a television series and the movie “Tarzan in Manhattan.”The leader of a midsize congregation, Ms. Lara, 66, had for the past several years been the main subject of a documentary project that sought to get beyond the gilded veneer of the Remnant Fellowship and investigate its inner workings. Set to debut on HBO Max in the fall, the multi-episode project, “The Way Down,” details the church’s origin in Ms. Lara’s religious-based weight-loss program, the Weigh Down Workshop.The diet program brought Ms. Lara fame — through appearances on popular shows like “Larry King Live” — and fortune, thanks to best-selling books touting her strategies to lose weight. But it also made her a controversial figure, with critics saying Weigh Down focused more on unconventional theology than on healthy eating habits. The documentary examines those issues, along with allegations that the church shunned and even harassed members who wanted to leave and that it functions more as a cult than a traditional religious institution.Ms. Lara in 2011. Her church grew out of the Weigh Down Workshop, a religious-based diet program she started in 1986.Sanford Myers/The Tennessean, via ImagnAt the time of the crash, the finishing touches were being put on the series. Suddenly, the filmmakers were faced with a new set of questions. What was the extent of Mr. Lara’s flying experience (he was operating the aircraft), and were his medical records up to date? What would happen to the church now that its founder and leader was dead? (A day after the crash, the church released a statement saying Ms. Lara’s daughter and son “intend to continue the dream that Gwen Shamblin Lara had of helping people find a relationship with God.”)And what would happen in the bitter custody case, involving Mr. Lara’s daughter with his ex-wife, which formed a crucial story line in the documentary?The filmmakers also said that since the crash, they had found that more people were eager to speak to them — former congregants who said they had previously been unwilling to go against the church publicly because they still had family members who are affiliated, and relatives of those killed in the crash who were skeptical of the church and now felt compelled to share their stories.On May 29, a single-pilot jet plane crashed into a lake near Nashville, killing all seven people on board including Ms. Lara.George Walker IV/The Tennessean, via Imagn“Within 24 hours I had heard from every single source, and the first thing everyone said was ‘I don’t want to be disrespectful, but please tell me this doesn’t change anything,’” regarding the documentary, said the producer Nile Cappello, an investigative journalist who started researching Remnant Fellowship in 2018.Ms. Cappello added that for those who had already spoken out against the church, some at great personal sacrifice, what she heard most frequently was worry the documentary would be curtailed in some way, “that we have opened up these wounds for nothing.”Though archival footage of Ms. Lara preaching and making media appearances is shown in the documentary, neither she nor any representatives from Remnant Fellowship were interviewed on camera by the filmmakers.“I never thought she would give us an interview,” the series director, Marina Zenovich, said of Ms. Lara. “Never.”Remnant Fellowship did not return calls seeking comment about the series for this article.While the filmmakers scrambled to incorporate news of the crash and its aftermath into the documentary, HBO Max altered its plans too. Now, rather than release a four-part series at the end of September, the first three episodes of “The Way Down,” will become available on Sept. 30, concluding with a “To Be Continued” message. The final two episodes will debut in early 2022, giving the filmmakers time to deal with the new footage. The documentary now begins with local news coverage of the crash.Marina Zenovich directed “The Way Down,” which will conclude early next year with two episodes that can incorporate new footage.Coley Brown for The New York Times“There is a fuller story to be told,” said Lizzie Fox, senior vice president of nonfiction at HBO Max. “We just want to make sure that we can allow enough time for the story to progress and the investigation to pursue some answers and give us time to interview all the subjects. With a limited docu-series, if there’s ever a chance to have a second part, I think it’s something that people tend to get excited about.”Ms. Zenovich is a documentarian who has spent most of her career focusing on men like Roman Polanski, Lance Armstrong and Robin Williams. But the world of evangelical religion was new terrain, one she decided to embark on because of the compelling character at the story’s center.“It’s deeply upsetting,” she said. “But I decided to do it because I was fascinated by Gwen.”Ms. Lara, who trained as a dietitian, began her Weigh Down Workshop in 1986. It was a diet plan that set aside common health guidelines and instead focused on a reliance on God, urging members that in order to understand true hunger they should eat only when their stomach growled. By the mid-2000s, her advice had become very popular within religious communities, and Ms. Lara’s books sold millions of copies. She parlayed that success into Remnant Fellowship, a church she founded in 1999 with her husband at the time, David Shamblin, after splitting with the Church of Christ. The Weigh Down philosophies remained a central tenet of her new congregation.Nile Cappello, right, the producer of the documentary, started researching Remnant Fellowship in 2018.Coley Brown for The New York TimesAs ex-members describe it in the documentary, the church was less a place of worship and more an all-encompassing power that took over every aspect of their lives, from where they worked and how they dressed to whom they married. Body image and appearances were central components, and the documentary chronicles Ms. Lara’s own transformation, from a bubbly young dietitian with girl-next-door looks into a very thin, heavily made-up avatar whose hair seemed to grow in height in relation to her power.Ms. Lara’s broader popularity eventually began to wane in part because of her rejection of the Holy Trinity, views that prompted a Christian publisher to cancel her upcoming book and others to stop promoting her weight loss program.“Gwen’s whole control is using misogyny against other women,” Ms. Cappello said, adding that Ms. Lara was one of the few female religious leaders in the evangelical Christian movement but had an entirely male leadership team. Ms. Lara also demanded that her congregants adhere to traditional familial gender roles in order to maintain their standing in the church.Among the allegations raised in “The Way Down” are accusations that individuals unable to lose weight were marginalized by the church community and that members were encouraged by Remnant leadership to stop taking prescribed medication including birth control and psychiatric drugs.Now the filmmakers are scrambling to tell a more comprehensive story of the church, its founding and its impact on Brentwood.“It was never about not continuing,” said Ms. Zenovich, who is particularly compelled by the stories of those who left the church. “It’s about shifting how we were going to tell the story.” More