Chicago Tribune on Railfanning

[Soo2610]

I thought it was well done. It will probably bring even more people out to Rochelle to check the place out.

[tree68]

I, too, found the article refreshingly neutral. As I was thinking about it later, it was obvious that it could apply to just about any hobby - fire buffs come to mind, obviously, but much of the article could have replaced "railfan" in it's various forms with "fire buff" without changing much more.

A-/B+ sounds about right.

Mark - Are we really that hard to please?!?!?![^]

[techguy57]

I stopped in Saturday night and grabbed the early edition. I thought it was a nice article that pointed out some of the more enticing aspects of the hobby. Also did a nice job covering Rochelle. As Jim said my only complaint is that I thought is was a bit sterile, but that was probably because of trying to get the info and interviews crammed in. Overall grade A-/B+.

Mike

[ironhorseman]

WHOO HOO!

You found it!

Thanks Nora
[:)][tup]

[Nora]

Here's a link to the article:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/chi-0401090516jan11,1,931340.story

But you'll have to register (free) in order to read it.

--Nora

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

I'm a regular reader of the Trib and I found the article to be well done. Since I have a variety of non-mainstream tastes (I played rugby when I was a younger man), I usually expect articles like this to portray us as more than a little weird.

Most of us are aware that we have a wide variety of tastes within the hobby, so it is refreshing to see an article aimed at the general public that points this out. Most of the analogies to other hobbies were reasonably valid and I would say that if the reporter had any preconceived notions, they were pretty well hidden.

All in all, I would say that this was one of the better-written articles about the hobby that I've seen in some time.

[jeaton]

The title is "On rail's trails". I just checked the site and a search doesn't bring it up. Maybe they post feature articles after the publication date, but I don't know.

[ironhorseman]

OK, what's the title of the article and how do I find the Transportation section online? Or is that possible?

I've been looking today (Sunday) and I'm not finding it.

Thanks

[jeaton]

I saw the article this morning and think it is fairly well done.

Of no news to us, the writer makes the point that we railfans have very diverse specific interests. Some of us just watch, others collect memorabilia, still others only go for steam. Going back to my post above, I still think that we are in many respects no different than any other hobbiests, enthusiasts or fans. Consider the various manifestations of a sports fan and you get my point.

The writer does not describe us at such, but notes that outsiders may consider railfans a little obsessive, fanatical or nerdy. But then, I ask, what is more nerdy than fans of a certain football team who will often be seen wearing a plastic replica of a block of swiss cheese on their heads.

Over-all I consider the article balanced and reasonable favorable to the image of the railfan. If you pick up a copy, you might want to keep it to show the person who asks, You are going to do WHAT?" (I didn't find the article on the Tribune web-site. Maybe they post more at a later time).

Happy railfanning!

Mark? I subscribe to Trains and and do the on-line thing. Is there a third category?

[eolafan]

I also have just completed reading the article over my Sunday morning coffee, and while it is a relatively "benign" article, I somehow didn't get the impression that the article truly captured the "essence" of railfanning. Let me explain that...I am not a photographer and I know lots of folks who are railfans and do not take pictures but love to come to trackside and simply watch trains (and listen on their scanners as I do). The reporter is female and makes mention of a few female fans she spoke with but mentions that she found this to be a primarily male hobby (but made a definite point that this is a unisex hobby...this should interest Mookie and others...as if you didn't know alreay). She likens railfanning to birdwatching and fishing and gave a fair amount of space to her interview with Mark Hemphill of TRAINS magazine. But when I had finished reading I still came away feeling it was a very sanatized and bland (while not being at all negative) article on our hobby. Somehow the "passion" many of us have for trains and railroading never quite came accross to me, although the reporter seemed to try and do this, but in my opinion fell short. I will be interested in what you others have to say after reading the article. Jim in Aurora, IL

[CShaveRR]

I just read the article. It's on the front page (and continued on page 5) of the Transportation section, with an attention-grabbing shot of a BNSF train, presumably taken at Rochelle. Rochelle gets a lot of attention (including the hokey hobo signs, unfortunately, but also including the Mirandas). I really didn't perceive too much that could be construed as out-and-out negative. Mark, I don't think it lived down to your expectations, fortunately.

[jeaton]

I have been watching this thread since it opened, and I would really be surprised if it didn't get very busy later today.

Even before I see the article, I am going to say this. We rail fans are no different than any of the millions who have healthy avocational interests in any of the other things going on in our world. Take a quick look around, and you will find people who focus all their spare time on cars, plans, celebrities, bikes, computers, the stock market, home decorating, collecting, and just about any business you can think of. If you can't spot the people, just look at huge variety of publications devoted to special interests.

My point is that, favorable or not, the writer could probably substitute just about any other hobby, and still convey the same message about the people who adopt that hobby. Hopefully, the article will be balanced to favorable, but if not, feel free to wonder about the author's favorite avocation.

[eolafan]

As somebody had previously reported the link is www.chicagotribune.com
Looking forward to seeing "us" described on Sunday.
Jim

[Trainnut484]

Ditto on the Tribune link request. I'll be checking the newstands for the paper itself.

Take care,

Russell

[RudyRockvilleMD]

Thanks for the alert. It will be interesting to see how the "Trib" characterizes us. Would it be possible to include a link to the Triune's article for those of us who forget to get on line on sunday and down load it?

[WDGF]

QUOTE: (As some of you may know, I bike to work whenever possible. I used to be able to get the folks at work by saying, "It must be spring...I swallowed my first bug of the year.")

Watch out for those bumble-bees, though. One of 'em hit my arm one time ... I can only imagine one in the mouth would be like![:D]

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dknelson

Newspaper editors just can't resist stories about people who eat bugs or watch trains.
Dave Nelson

I like this! Tell that reporterette to call me - she wouldn't believe my story!

Mook

[CShaveRR]

Yeah, why not? They snack on us!

(As some of you may know, I bike to work whenever possible. I used to be able to get the folks at work by saying, "It must be spring...I swallowed my first bug of the year.")

Sorry...getting a little off topic.

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dknelson

Newspaper editors just can't resist stories about people who eat bugs or watch trains.
Dave Nelson

So what's wrong with snacking on the occasional bug? [dinner]




Just kidding!! Yuck!!!!!

[dknelson]

Newspaper editors just can't resist stories about people who eat bugs or watch trains.
Dave Nelson

[CShaveRR]

Still, Train (oops, Trains) has come a long way. I remember decades ago when some other magazine (could it have been Playboy? and if so, what was I doing with it?) listed Trains in an article about really weird publications...along the lines of "No kidding... there's really a magazine about that stuff?"

[Soo2610]

Hey, Don't knock them until the article comes out! They have had some darn good articles in the "Transportation Section" in the last year or so.

[kenneo]

Good Shot, Mark!

[swg] [2c] [:-,]

[Anonymous]

The reporter of the story interviewed me. The interview left me dubious that the reporter was not prejudging rail enthusiasts as weird, as the questions she asked seemed intended to prove that opinion.

I am hoping it does not turn out poorly.

By the way, after the Tribune listed the 50 best magazines -- and left the "s" off "Trains" -- we called them and they were very embarassed. A correction was printed in the next edition.

[JoeKoh]

I wonder if any trains will be for sale in the classifieds.
stay safe
Joe

[Anonymous]

The Chicago Tribune was already scooped this year by their biggest rival: The
Cedar Rapids Gazette. They did a story on railfans and how the post-9/11 security
mindedness impacts us rail fans just wanting to pursue our interests legally. I
personally have never run into any county mounty who's being over-zealous about
security, just the occasional cruiser asking if I'm having engine trouble while I'm
parked at a grade crossing waiting for a train (I have unbelievable luck with that).

[AltonFan]

QUOTE: Does the Tribune put their articles online? If so, could you make that link available when and if it does become available?

Yes, the Chicago Tribune is online. But you have to register to read the current articles, and pay for archived articles. http://www.chicagotribune.com/

[tree68]

I'd be interested in seeing what they have to say - a second on the request for the link, or at least a "book report" on their report.

If a newspaper is going to tell us why we like railfanning, it's a safe bet we're some sort of kooks, and any and all stories they've ever heard about 'stupid railfan tricks' will be a prominent part of the article. Any railroad official they quote will be anti-railfan.

That's my guess. I hope they prove me wrong.

[CShaveRR]

Yeah, but even then they called it "Train" Magazine the entire time.

That's okay...we knew what they meant!