Undertoad's quote from a survivor above is the most telling thing I have read.
Some of the folks that made it out were saved by the release of the canopy after the boat was submerged.
That means it was still upright underwater, not overturned or "capsized."

I think the problem started with a reporter and editor who did not (probably still does not) know what the word "capsize" means, but thought it sounded nicely catastrophic.
Other news outlets went with the error, making it common knowledge, but still not true.

Coming soon in another thread: The Thailand Cave story.

There was an interview with a couple from the other duck boat, the one that made it back safely, in which they said they heard their captain say the doomed duck boat flipped over or sank. Perhaps that's where it got started.

I just saw on the news that the owner of the duck boat company is being sued for 100 million.

What difference does it make if it capsized or not. The story is it sank and people died.

I rode one giving tours of Hyannis Harbor on Cape Cod a couple years ago.

A swamped boat should never capsize; trap and kill it occupants.

In a previous event, an investigation noted serious design deficiencies with that duck boat. For example, it had no reserve buoyancy.

In a Lake George event maybe ten years ago, defective construction made that boat unstable. So it capsized, thereby trapping and killing passengers.

Gee, the second most active thread of all (6) I've started.
My original point got lost, however.
I know nothing of Duckboats, but was interested in the fact that the one in Arkansas seemed to simply go straight down and 99% of the news stories got stuck on the term "capsized," which did not further understanding of the event.

The one in Philly got run over by a huge barge on the Delaware River.

Bruce says above:
"What difference does it make if it capsized or not. The story is it sank and people died."
Of course that is the story.
This thread, however, is about the media use of the term "capsize," when it is not certain it did.

I think someone has already coined a term for that phenomenon - Fake News.

They used the wrong word to describe what happened, 90% on the public doesn't know the difference, and 10% who do realize it doesn't make a difference how it went down.

Makes no difference if you did a cannonball or a back dive with 1 1/2 somersaults, and 3 1/2 twists, if you land on the rocks. :yeldead:

That's a fairly accurate description of the term. Find a minor detail to pick at, and claim that makes the whole story, everything by the author, their news outlet, and the industry in general Fake News. Of course, even the minor detail is not strictly necessary, but if it's there, trumpet it.

They needed a bigger duck:

Attachment 64739

One of the two "captains", the one who did the water part, was indicted yesterday on 17 counts of misconduct leading to death.
My original beef was that almost all of the news stories reported that the boat capsized.
All of the reports after yesterday's announcement but one (CNN) now say sank and do not mention capsize.
Rest assured that I will post again when the official finding is that it did NOT capsize, overturn or go upside down.

I had this argument with the blond bimbos from channel 6 and 29 local news. I said the reason why your news is useless: a car crash is shown. But why it happened, what the mistake was, how it could have been avoided. and what should be learned is never reported. They were indignant insisting that is not news.

Among critically important facts are why so many could not get out of a sinking swamped boat. It remains unreported. And is critical for informed news.

Maybe you can extend an invitation to the blond bimbos [sic] (that's bigoted), from channel 6 and 29 local news, to join the Cellar so we can hear all about you it.