K2 Tragedy: When Tragedy Strikes, Big Mountain Media Battles It Out With Perfect Timing-An Adventurist Editorial

Anticipation for a successful rescue of 12 trapped climbers on K2 is beginning to wain.  Reports have popped up from all over the world reporting a myriad of facts, suggestions, and even what-if’s in regards to this accident.  Millions of people have now seen the headlines thrown out all over the world:  “11 Climbers Dead” “Tragedy on K2″, etc.

I have tried my best to report what was currently taking place in regards to the tragic accident on K2.  My reports come from a variety of sources including ExplorersWeb, EverestNews, and the expedition dispatch’s themselves.  I have also tracked the media and what it has put out and have been trying to decifer through the mountains of information being released on an hourly basis.

My first inkling that major media had finally caught wind of this tragedy came at 5 am yesterday, when I first began seeing Spanish media reports.  Later in the day, CNN would run a piece that mentioned ExplorersWeb’s K2climb.com site as the source of their information.

ExplorersWeb has recently put up a rebuttal to claims that 11 climbers are dead, suggesting that only one death has been confirmed.  Meanwhile, Everestnews, another major source for big mountain information has put up a list of the dead—a controversial move since no ‘official’ word has been given by expedition companies or climbers in the region.  They report 11 deaths due to the original avalanche, and another two do to recent rescue efforts.  Which is the correct version, and why are these reports so varied?

My first exposure to reporting on mountain climbing came in 2006 when I began covering the tragedy on Mt. Hood.  After that tragedy ended, I went on to report on the 2007 and 2008 Mt. Everest climbing season’s.  Through my time of reporting on these events, I have garnered a name for being somewhere in the middle, I have also become a trusted authority on the information I present.  People come because they know I try to sift through the facts from the crap and tell them what is going on.

Yesterday, in my K2 update, I mentioned being confused over recent reports that were so far out there that they were hard to believe.  Was it one death or eleven?

Going on facts and previous knowledge of situations of the scope of K2, one can presume many things.  Eleven people could very well be dead.  Being trapped above the death zone for three days simply does not happen.  It is unheard of and in most cases a sure death.  One day above 20,000 ft. has killed many climbers.  Rob hall and Scott Fischer both perished in a matter of hours after they were stuck in the death zone of Mt. Everest in 1996.  Both of these guys were guides with more big mountain experience than most.  If anyone could survive, they should have.  We all know now that they didn’t.

Fact:  On more than one occasion miracles have happened out of the ordinary.  Climbers have been blown off as dead and have quietly walked back in to camp hours and days after they should have perished.  The will to survive lies within each of them.  That will, depending on it’s strength, can work miracles.

EverestNews is currently running headlines suggesting that they have a list of the ‘official’ dead.  What I know from experience of covering these events is to look deeper in to what is being presented.  Their reports are coming from a climber and his guide who are supposedly involved in the rescue efforts.  I am not out to mention names or presume that these guys are sensationalizing the news to get their own names in the mix, but it has been well-known that previous coverage of events has sparked this kind of interest. If a guide has his name in the Press, especially for a rescue effort-whether he has really done so, or not, than more than likely others will see this and look to his company for a future expedition.  The mountaineering world revolves around money, especially these big mountain expeditions like a K2 or Mt. Everest.  There are literally hundreds of thousands of dollars to make for each expedition.

Over previous years we have heard a lot about the commercialization of Mt. Everest.  The tragedy in 1996 was blamed on to many climbers on the peak at one time.  In 2008, there were literally hundreds more on Everest than in 1996.  In 2008, you also have the power of the internet.

The Internet in relation to big mountain climbing has only came to fruition in the last few years.  You can now follow an expedition, get specific GPS coordinates, and get daily updates that the expeditioners provide through SAT phone or other means.  When something major happens, the world knows.

ExplorersWeb and EverestNews are the two largest big mountain news sites in the world.  Major media watches both for continuous updates and frequently reports of what one, or the other,  is publishing.  This has added some competition to both sites.  Generally if a report is published in the media from either source, it can mean big traffic to either site, or even a payoff for the information.  Either way, these sites are making money from an advertising standpoint.

That’s not all bad.  Generally speaking competition can be a good thing.  It rewards the reader with two different sides of a major news event that they couldn’t get anywhere else.  Sometimes two sides can be bad.  On more than one ocassion I have had to sift through hype or unofficial reports to find out what exactly is going on.  Confusion ensues.

ExplorersWeb recently put up a piece calling out the reporting of EverestNews for unethical practices.  This is also not the first time these two sites have battled publicly.  They each know the traffic the other site gets and each of them tries to top the other with the scoop.  Sometimes it works out for one and sometimes it doesn’t.  The reader is left with some confusion as to what is taking place, and why.  With such a tragedy being reported, these two sites are intent upon trying to call out the other for one fact, or another.

To put it quite simply, when a big story breaks, such as the current tragedy and rescue efforts on K2, these two sites know they are in the spotlight and are trying to do what they can to garner readers away from the other, even at the cost of doing this publicly.  Each of them have their own die-hard supporters, and many of these supporters are not afraid to jump in the mix and sling the mud.  Many climbers will choose one of the other–but not both–when it comes to big mountain reporting.

This leaves many of us in the ‘land of confusion’.  I have learned through experience to second guess each of them and go directly to the source.  Even then you are not guaranteed a proper report, but rather an overview of the events, that may be politically motivated.

Reporting on big mountain adventure is definitely a challenge for the strong at heart.  Many times you will get a scoop only to find out that it is not truthful, or was spread by someone looking to promote their own cause.  Even mountaineers are notorious for spreading false information to the media, for a chance at making a bit more money later on.

In the cycling world, steroids are the big issue.  In the climbing world, that issue is money.  Everything revolves around money and fame.  Why else would someone want to tackle Mt. Everest?  They know it can make a career or get their name in the papers.  Climbing big mountains in 2008 is a lot different than climbing mountains in 1923.  George Mallory exclaimed that he wanted to climb Everest “because it was there”.  Even then, though, the thought of fame to become the first person to summit the world’s highest mountain was there.  Mallory’s attempts were covered extensively in the press.  He would eventually make more than one attempt on the peak and leave his body in it’s wake.

In 1923 it was not about money.  There were no big corporate sponsors, no media advertising contracts, and no money to be gained from guiding on the world’s tallest peaks.  It was all about fame and the will to succeed.  In 2008, the rate of success has dramatically changed on Everest.  Over 400 people summited the world’s tallest peak in 2008.  In comparison, on K2, the world’s most dangerous peak, there have only been 169 summits in it’s history and 62 deaths.  That rate is equal to one in three people dying.

On July 31, 2008, 17 people started for the summit of K2.  That is an unreal number when taken in consideration of the death rate on K2.  Many of these climbers would go up knowing that one in three could perish.  Out of 17 people, in perfect circumstances, and in respects to K2’s previous history, five would die.

We all know now that the circumstances were less than perfect.  The weather was nice enough to climb, but weather is only one thing to take in to consideration.  Early reports on K2 suggest that to many climbers decided to go up at once.  This halted the climbers and forced progress to slow way down.  Most were way behind schedule and forced to descend in the dark.  Even on Everest, thought to be one of the safest 8,000 meter peaks, this is looking for disaster.

The climbers were bunched up near the summit trying to navigate through the bottleneck.  Many had made a successful summit of K2.  In fact, most had.

It is a well-known fact that 80% of all big mountain deaths occur on the descent.  This is due to a lack of energy–being tired–from putting everything you have in to reaching the top of a mountain.  Many people don’t take the descent in to consideration

The climbers got bunched up while trying to navigate down K2’s infamous bottleneck.  The moment of the avalanche is hard to put a specific time on, yet, at some point, it did happen.  The worst case scenario came to fruition almost like rereading a book.  The thoughts are always out there of a worst case scenario, yet when events start taking shape, no one notices.

Eleven climbers dead.

EverestNews made this report and has put it in perspective.  ExplorersWeb is still very much involved in ongoing rescue efforts.  Their communication equipment is what most big mountaineers prefer and when tragedy strikes, they are left with harrowing dispatches that they have to hold on to, until they decide to make them public.  Most of this is to allow time to notify the climbers’ families of their passing before reporting it publicly.  They are also trying to make sure they have everything perfect and in place and the facts have been checked.  EverestNews does not have this capacity and is left with only what climbers tell them.

Fact vs. Fiction

Over the past three years of big mountain coverage, I have come to the conclusion that both EverestNews and ExplorersWeb offer up a needed media resource.  Neither source is perfect, but they do clue you in to what is going on.  I visit both daily.  I have also scrutinized and praised each in regards to different articles or news flashes.  My only problem with EverestNews is their lack of reporting a source of the information with their reports and of sensationalizing headlines that, on occasion, aren’t 100% true.  This could lead to calls of sensationalism reporting, or hiding the source to protect them from the fallout.  ExplorersWeb readily makes their sources known and available to check out.

My problem with ExplorersWeb is their frequent jumps in to politics, something that I feel is not a part of the mountaineering community.  Tina, who helps run ExplorersWeb and their other sites, does know my feelings and we have discussed this at some length.  I can not question their facts or information, but rather their political jumps, from time to time, that takes the focus off the community they have helped build.  I feel politics are relavent in certain circumstances, but for most, we go there for the big adventure news.

Tina’s recent editorial on how the K2 disaster is being reported is a bit questionable.  I agree that EN may be sensationalizing a bit, but I also disagree that this was the proper time to make a public notice in regards to this.  The K2 tragedy will go down as one of, if not THE worst mountaineering disasters to ever take place.  With victims, families, expedition crews, and rescuers still trying to save lives and piece together what has recently happened, any jump in to a public battle with another website seemingly takes the attention off the tragedy at hand.

I am in no way, shape or form, trying to pick a fight with the two leading big mountain news organizations, but simply offering, from a reader’s standpoint, as well as someone who does cover the same events, a view that might be useful in the future.

Mountain journalism is a hard field to crack, but mountain journalism should stay mountain journalism, not a he said, she said, mud-slinging political factory that finds a tragedy the time to empower one’s own cause.  Most readers read both sites, and as such, we don’t care about the inner brewings of competitive reporting.  Stick to the facts–and this is to both–and stick to the reporting.  The things you find wrong with each other are what is confusing the rest of us.  Competitve reporting has no place in mountain journalism, nor history.  Those are just my two cents.