Friendly skies?: Only NASA knows the truth, editorial, Salt Lake Tribune
"In a display of institutional and bureaucratic arrogance that is distressingly commonplace in the Bush administration, NASA, aka the gang that couldn't fly straight, is stonewalling the press and public."
How safe is air travel, really?, Smarter Travel
"Just how ambivalent NASA was about making the report public can be clearly seen in the timing of the release. Adopting a tactic universally utilized to minimize media attention and coverage, NASA issued the report on New Year's Eve, the year's slowest news day."
NASA's unreliable survey of air mishaps leads us around in circles, Cincinnati Inquirer
"NASA, which is charged with keeping an eye on the sky, reportedly has been keeping scary secrets about what really goes on in the wild blue yonder. Fasten your seat belt, because even figuring out the air safety report released on New Year's Eve gets hairy."
NASA Insults Pilots, Press and Public, Tampa Tribune
"This insult comes after the agency originally refused to release the information to the Associated Press on the grounds it "could materially affect the public confidence in, and the commercial welfare of, the air carriers." Which is it: too frightening or nothing to see? We deserve better, and if we don't get it, NASA needs better leadership."
NASA's stalling on study raises fear and questions, Denver Post
"The flying public still doesn't know whether to be concerned about safety in the skies or to take the word of NASA administrator Michael Griffin, who says the survey shouldn't be cause for worry. The only thing that is certain is that NASA did a poor job of handling the situation. This chain of events does not exactly inspire confidence in the judgment of the people who send astronauts into space."
NASA, not pilot, error, Plam Beach Post
"But Mr. Griffin's idea of disclosure is more subterfuge. The New Year's Eve release was a heavily redacted version of the study, and it was too disjointed to analyze. The edited information made it impossible to determine the responding pilot's experience, what type of plane the pilot flew, or details of the incidents described. Mr. Griffin said NASA wanted to protect the anonymity of respondents. Bunk. The real reason is what the agency has been saying all along: The survey's publication might damage public confidence in flying."
NASA taking prize for arrogance, Sun Sentinel
"Anything that can give the public understandable safety information on air travel is valuable. Congress knows that. The public knows that. And if NASA officials weren't so arrogant, they'd know it, too."
NASA Handled Study On Safety Improperly, The Intelligencer
"NASA, like any other federal agency, is supposed to serve the people, not any business or industry. It may be time for Congress to remind the agency of that."
NASA Releases Air Safety Report, Sort Of, Hartford Courant
"NASA released the heavily redacted survey results on New Year's eve without analysis, and presented it in such a way that independent analysis seems to be very difficult. It's as if we asked a waiter for a glass of water and he came back and dumped it on our heads."
Whither NASA? Safety study raises questions about space agency, Worcester Telegram
"The questions are inescapable: Why spend $11.3 million on a report that is useless to researchers and policymakers? Why is NASA dabbling in air safety studies rather than focusing on expanding the boundaries of human knowledge? Does the agency that put mankind on the moon have the right stuff to plan and execute the next phase of manned space exploration?"
Air Safety: Cause for study, Seattle Post-Intelligencer
"It looks like NASA has taken lessons on how to handle intelligence from the CIA. The way the civilian agency has dealt with the release of a flight safety survey stinks of paranoia and secrecy."
NASA should provide clarity on air-safety report, Kansas City Star
"The immediate problem - magnified by NASAs bungling - is how to interpret the data."