Fatal accident investigation
*Facepalm*
US Coastguard releases documents relating to the failure of the OceanGate Titan submersible. Some redacted. For example:
INTERVIEW OF [REDACTED] BY LCDR [REDACTED]:
Q: So how did you get yourself started into submersible operations?
A: Well, I'm sure you're familiar with my film "Titanic"...
(From about 2 mins) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMUjCZ7MMWQ
To be fair, yeah, it's fair enough to just redact all names where it's necessary, rather than going through the rigmarole and error-prone process of redacting some but not others depending on whether they're identifiable and/or consent.
But it *is* a very funny example, the subject of the report aside.
Also, underredacting is irreversible, while overredacting isn't. There like are more incentives to avoid underredacting (because there are people with potentially clear and demonstrable harm from such a mistake) than overredacting, too.
@robryk Yeah, better a bit of a giggle from a few folk on the internet than a very serious letter from a lawyer.
E.g. I recently received a document (https://www.oeffentlichkeitsgesetz.ch/downloads/befreite-dokumente/efd/2025-03-12_scan_2025-10-10-16-14-11.pdf) as a result of a FOIA-style Swiss federal law. As previously agreed upon, some attachments were omitted entirely (because they would most likely not have been releasable and I didn't care for them). Amusingly, the titles of those attachments (which we actually discussed earlier in person) were redacted from the attachment list.
I suspect that the reasoning was similar: there was very little chance of me complaining about that.
