Defenceless Dead Media Rush To Blame Air India Pilot

---

 


The ink is barely dry on the preliminary report into the tragic June 12 crash of Air India Flight 171 - a Boeing 787 Dreamliner that plunged into a medical college housing block in Ahmedabad just seconds after takeoff - and already, parts of the British press have done what they do best: smear the dead to save the powerful.
A total of 260 lives were lost, including everyone onboard except one British national, and several on the ground.
And yet, instead of waiting for a thorough, fact-based conclusion, journalists have gleefully latched onto a single ambiguous cockpit exchange to paint a dead man - Captain Sumeet Sabharwal - as the architect of his demise.
According to investigators and US officials cited in the Wall Street Journal, the cockpit voice recorder captured First Officer Clive Kunder asking: “Why did you cut off?”
To which Sabharwal replied: “I didn’t.”
That’s it. That’s the evidence!
From this short exchange, British reporters have leapt to the conclusion that the fuel control switches, which were found to be set to “cut-off” shortly after takeoff, must have been manually flipped by the captain.
The line “he stayed eerily calm” has been repeated across headlines and stories like it’s the gospel, even though no reporter was in the cockpit, nor has the full transcript been released.
This reeks of tabloid theatre, not journalism. As the name suggests, “reporters” are meant to report the facts of an event, not to inject personal opinions into the story, unless it is a clearly identified first-person account.
Let’s be clear: Sabharwal said he did not cut off the fuel. His voice was recorded. So why the headlong rush to hang blame on him? Why not explore the possibility - one raised even by aviation experts - that this could have been the result of a technical malfunction, software anomaly, or mechanical failure?
Convenient blame-the-pilot narrative
Fuel control switches have transitioned on their own before. Ask the engineers at All Nippon Airways (ANA), who documented such an incident during an approach in Japan.
It’s not science fiction - it’s a documented reality of fly-by-wire systems. But such complex truths are inconvenient for a media industry hooked on scandal, not substance.
And here lies the problem: the need to protect Boeing’s image, especially after years of reputational damage from the 737 MAX crashes and the MCAS debacle, has created a media atmosphere where the default mode is blame-the-pilot.
It’s a convenient narrative that keeps shareholders happy, regulators off-balance, and headline writers busy.
But it’s also cowardly and morally bankrupt. This isn’t just lazy journalism - it’s an insult to the intelligence of the public and a slap in the face to grieving families.
By portraying Sabharwal as calm, aloof, or negligent in his final seconds, without evidence and against his own recorded denial, the British press isn’t reporting - it’s rewriting the story to suit their appetite for drama.
Where is the investigative rigour? Where is the restraint? Since when did “eerily calm” become acceptable shorthand for insinuating guilt? This is not how journalism works. Or rather, it shouldn’t be.
What we’re witnessing is the lowest form of reporting: yellow journalism dressed up in tech jargon, and it’s “sensationalism on autopilot”.
And the public - especially those with families in the skies - deserves far better than this tabloid trash parading as insight.
Let the investigators finish their job. Let the data tell the story. Until then, every journalist with a conscience should resist the urge to speculate, dramatise, or demonise. Especially when the one being accused is no longer here to speak for himself.
Because here’s the truth that no headline will print: dead men can’t defend themselves - but good journalism can. - Mkini
JOSEPH MASILAMANY has a deep appreciation for the science, engineering, and people behind every flight. A frequent flyer between Borneo and Kuala Lumpur, he brings both critical insight and personal passion to this aviation commentary.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---