REFLOATING THE TITANIC

Sir, - In April 1912, the New York Times reputation for accuracy was greatly enhanced when its editor correctly concluded that…

Sir, - In April 1912, the New York Times reputation for accuracy was greatly enhanced when its editor correctly concluded that a cessation of wireless signals from the Titanic meant the liner had sunk. The Times initial report of Titanic's loss stands alone when contrasted with the banner headlines of its rivals, which proclaimed that all on board were safe and the damaged Titanic was being towed to Halifax.

A lack of hard information, in the days before the arrival of the rescue ship Carparthiain New York, resulted in some imaginative reporting by the papers of the time. I was reminded of this by the article on the current expedition to the site of the Titanic wreck (August 24th), which seems to be more of a tribute to Mr Tulloch's promotional skills than an accurate assessment of reality.

The grand plan to refloat the Titanic, which the article's headline proclaims, on closer examination seems to boil down to an attempt to raise a relatively small section (13 tons) of the ship. The suggestion that the section to be raised contains two first class cabins seems quite grandiose when compared to the Sunday Times' description of a 33 foot section of detached hull with six portholes.

The vague reference to three unnamed frail survivors, and two named personalities - one of whom apparently is not on board at all - points to an article based on colourful press releases. The Sunday Times article was at least researched and highlighted the difficulties facing the organisers of the venture.

READ MORE

Perhaps that would be a better source if you intend to keep us informed of the forthcoming events at the wreck site. The rights or wrongs of the activity is a matter for individual decision.

Yours, etc.,

Chairman,

The Irish Titanic Historical Society,

Coast Road, Malahide,

Co. Dublin.