Internet Journalism - - Who’s Writing This Stuff? 

     A June 9, 2016, article put out by the AP, from Ersey City, New Jersey starts out by saying: 

 “A man getting ready to watch the sunrise on a piece of plywood in a marina _ _” 

      Okay, did this man really expect to see the sunrise on a piece of plywood? Usually, sunrises are seen in the sky, but in New Jersey who knows. 

 The report continues:      

“The man was sent drifting into the river on an 8-foot-long piece of plywood_ _ _” 

      Okay, so the man was on a floating piece of plywood, and probably planning on watching the sunset in the sky. [I feel a little better about this guy already.] The question is, why was the man on the plywood. Maybe he couldn’t afford a boat. But a piece of plywood? Give me a break. 
      Now a few addition details would have been helpful. It says an 8-foot-long piece. Question: how wide was this piece?” How thick was this piece?” If I was going to use a piece of plywood for a boat, these additional dimensions would make a big difference. 

 The report continues:

 “_ _ _ was swept out by the Hudson River current_ _ _” 

      So not only is this guy on a piece of plywood, but launches this makeshift boat where there is a current that will take him out into a harbor, and as the report says, “into the harbor's highly traveled commercial lanes.” There is no indication that he had any way to control the piece of plywood---no motor, no oars. So what did he think was going to happen? 

The report continues: 

“The man told rescuers from fire department marine units that he went out to the dock at the Newport Yacht Club and Marina in Jersey City to watch the sun come up.” 

      So how did this guy get from the dock onto a small piece of plywood? Was this piece of plywood part of the dock? Did this guy get off the dock and onto the plywood on purpose? If so, and without any additional information, maybe some psychological evaluation is in order. 

The report continues: 

“Guzzo said he believes the man stayed on the piece of wood because he didn't want to jump into the water and lose his cellphone while swimming back.” 

      So now the report is telling us what a third party is guessing the man on the piece of plywood might have been thinking. That isn’t even hearsay testimony. This is pure conjecture and I’m not sure why it’s included in the report. 

Other questions: 

      What part of the sunrise could he see from the piece of plywood that he couldn’t see from the dock? 

      And last but not least, did he ever get his pictures of the sunrise? 
      So here we have a piece of internet journalism that is poorly written, and lacking in pertinent information. It would be less disturbing if this was an isolated case.