3 ms·
I'm a little outraged that the skier was outraged while being interviewed. He's in a sport that is very risky, and part of that risk is performing for an audien
by kordless 11y ago
I'm a little outraged that the skier was outraged while being interviewed. He's in a sport that is very risky, and part of that risk is performing for an audience which wants to see things better and in more detail. Those drones are part of the camera network of an event he's performing at, so it's unlikely anyone did anything wrong, other than maybe they put in the wrong battery packs. You can't have it both ways.
Note that I'm not saying he can't have some emotional response, but public outrage is basically saying "this shouldn't ever happen and people should be afraid of this" which is stupid given shit happens when you are doing highly competitive and dangerous things as a performer - which includes the venue and staff filming it in new and interesting ways. The audience demands it, and you as an athlete and performer are part of it.
The older I get, the more the unnecessary spread of cognitive dissonance irritates me.
- an_account 11y agoHe should be outraged! The drone operator was told that he "had to fly outside of the race track and follow the racer from a 15-metre distance." This clearly didn't happen. If the cameraman on the side of the track suddenly took his camera into the middle of the track, it would obviously be outrageous.
- hristov 11y agoSkiing is already risky enough he shouldn't have TV stations adding to the risk. It is wrong to say "well it is risky anyways, so who cares about one more source of risk." This is like saying that someone is already rich anyways, so it is ok steal from them. I can guarantee you that professional skiers are very careful about all the risks they undertake, and work hard to minimize those risks. It is very understandable this skier is angry to learn that a TV station just added a new way for him to die.