The Aviation Herald is an excellent website that has been around since 2008, which reports on aviation incidents and accidents. While I don’t know him personally, the site’s founder, Simon Hradecky, does an incredible job and service to the industry, and reports with absolutely no bias.
So along those lines, he has just shared the details of a lawsuit he has been dealing with since last year, which is kind of shocking. The cost of this took such a toll on him that he needed to sell the apartment he has lived in for 41 years, causing him to move into his office. This is just terrible.
The Aviation Herald sued over airline safety report
In July 2025, The Aviation Herald reported on an incident involving a flight operated by Slovakian carrier Go2Sky, which was operating from Zakynthos, Greece (ZTH), to Amsterdam, Netherlands (AMS).
The site initially reported that the flight had to divert due to an engine issue, which was based on a report from a passenger, as well as another reliable source. However, the following day, Hradecky received information that there had been no engine issues at all, and instead, it was a stab trim problem. Based on that evidence, he updated his report to reflect those correct details.
Hradecky of course acknowledges that his reports can sometimes have mistakes, but he’s about as accurate as they get when it comes to reporting on the details of aviation safety. Hradecky has reported on tens of thousands of flight incidents and accidents over the years, and thousands of those have involved engine issues, and those range from very minor to serious.
In November 2025, Hradecky received a notification from the court in Salzburg, telling him that Go2Sky had filed a lawsuit against him and his website for defamation and untrue statements, related to the above coverage.
They claimed damage of €15,000 due to defamation and loss of reputation, and they also wanted a preliminary injunction forbidding him to continue reporting this aircraft had an engine problem on that flight, because of the danger that he would repeat such statements.
The airline also argued that he was in control of social media channels that had spread this information, even ones he had nothing to do with. Then in December 2025, Hradecky had to fly to the first court hearing, where the carrier’s commercial director reportedly acknowledged they had not suffered any damage as a result of the coverage, and also confirmed that there had been a stab trim problem before takeoff, which had been signed off on, but then it happened again during the flight.
In April 2026, Go2Sky proposed a court issued conditional settlement, which came with another demand. The airline wanted The Aviation Herald to remove its reporting of a 2016 Go2Sky incident. The thing is, the airline hadn’t contested that coverage for nearly a decade, and it was also accurate based on reports from the Norwegian Accident Investigation Board. So at this point the airline was even trying to silence fully accurate reporting.
Hradecky drew a line in the sand there, and decided he wasn’t going to be bullied into removing a report from all the way back then about something that had been verified by authorities. As a result, he rejected the settlement.
Ultimately the two parties reached a settlement many months later, which included a financial penalty, and also The Aviation Herald having to put a note at the top of the website for a period of time about the incorrect reporting:
The statement published by us on 04.07.2025: “Incident: Go2Sky B738 at Zakynthos on Jun 29th 2025, engine trouble” is untrue and there had been no engine trouble of whatsoever nature. In consideration of the court proceedings held before Landesgericht Salzburg (Republic of Austria), file number: 5 Cg 133/25t, and the facts presented by Go2Sky, spol. s r.o., we, NOMIS SOFT Datenverarbeitung Gesellschaft m.b.H. as the media owner and Simon Hradecky as the author of the article published on 04.07.2025, hereby revoke this statement. See the Explanation of this statement
Hradecky concludes by saying that “it needs to be stated, that the entire legal costs were not covered by an insurance but needed to be paid by myself – in order to financially survive that blow I needed to sell my apartment, that I had lived in for 41 years and that had been my nest in all these years, and move into my office instead.”
I feel horribly for the founder of The Aviation Herald
Admittedly when you publish stuff online for a living, you open yourself up to potential legal action, so it’s important to be careful with what you report. At the same time, I find the basis of this lawsuit to be incredibly bizarre in the first place.
The Aviation Herald reports on aviation incidents and accidents with no bias, and has reported on thousands of engine issues over the years.
Obviously in this specific case, it was incorrect to report this as an engine issue rather than a stab trim problem, because sometimes details won’t quite be right. But… why does the airline care so much? It’s not like one type of issue is obviously worse than the other.
The airline then demanding that a post from 2016 be removed is just absurd, when that was also based on an investigation by regulators, who confirmed the reporting.
The only thing I can come up with here is that Go2Sky’s Wikipedia page lists two things in the “Incidents and accidents” section, and both link to The Aviation Herald. Maybe the airline just wants to act like it has never had any sort of an issue? Then again, virtually every airline has had some number of incidents, so none of this makes much sense to me.
Either way, it sure strikes me as very strong Streisand effect vibes, since a non-story is being turned into a story, and I don’t think the airline looks good here.
Bottom line
The Aviation Herald was sued by Slovakian airline Go2Sky over a safety report the site posted in 2025. A Go2Sky flight had to divert, and the initial report was that it was due to an engine issue, though after a day, the report was updated to claim it was actually due to a stab trim problem.
That seemingly really rubbed the airline the wrong way, and they ended up filing a lawsuit, and even tried to demand that previous (accurate) coverage from a decade earlier be removed. The site’s founder has been doing this for a long time, and this is the first time he has had to deal with a lawsuit… and it cost him dearly. I feel horribly for him.
What do you make of this aviation safety reporting lawsuit?
Some people set up a gofundme
https://www.gofundme.com/f/stand-with-simon-hradecky-keep-the-aviation-herald-flying
It's us, thanks!
We are Associazione Italiana Aviazione Civile, a twenty-year-old Italian aviation community. Like thousands of others, we have relied on The Aviation Herald almost every day.
Just to let you know: today our fundraiser just surpassed 5k Euros!
I remember earlier days, when Mr. Ferjancek was not ordering cleaning supplies at some airports. Instead he asked cabin crew to steal some toilet paper from hotel and bring it on board in baggage. He is this type of person.
AVHerald / Simon Hradecky has a PayPal Donation page!! Let's help him out.
https://www.paypal.com/donate?token=zadUm1TewXPqTJLUya8UwNnQClzmrdrzNa_88VEThPuCDrlGrMAZPvt264BjCaEAUg_Kf5I_z4666xcX
Does Trump’s wife own Go2Sky?
She is Slovenian, not Slovakian.
His side of the story is "I had released the first report based on two entirely independent sources and under use of more than necessary care by a journalist."
The sources may have been independent (of each other, and of him), but they were not reliable. The passenger was no more trustworthy than the "influencer" who claims Delta ran out of gas and abandoned her in Fort Myers. The other source was "several times proven"...
His side of the story is "I had released the first report based on two entirely independent sources and under use of more than necessary care by a journalist."
The sources may have been independent (of each other, and of him), but they were not reliable. The passenger was no more trustworthy than the "influencer" who claims Delta ran out of gas and abandoned her in Fort Myers. The other source was "several times proven" -- in other words, earlier tips were correct, so now all tips would be accepted without question.
This is not journalism. Best practice is to have two reliable sources. Here, there are none. More importantly, "necessary care by a journalist" requires contacting the defamed party and reporting their response.
Gossip columnists can get away with spreading rumors about public figures. Bloggers can't do it with companies who buy jet fuel by the ton. See, for example, the wheelchair-rights advocate who asked Ben for a retraction, and got it. American Airlines settled with her, also. Shyness is not a defense to failure to contact for a response.
Respectfully, this is a whole load of nonsesnse and reads like someone from the Airline or the legal office that sued AvHerald. All journalism is always only as reliable as its sources. Reporting on aviation incidents is not equivalent to a gossip column, and a human factor is always the case in any kind of journalism. This is why most civilised legal systems have a neutral reportage defence for defamation, because it is inherent and...
Respectfully, this is a whole load of nonsesnse and reads like someone from the Airline or the legal office that sued AvHerald. All journalism is always only as reliable as its sources. Reporting on aviation incidents is not equivalent to a gossip column, and a human factor is always the case in any kind of journalism. This is why most civilised legal systems have a neutral reportage defence for defamation, because it is inherent and reasonably expected that sometimes facts will not be perfectly verifiable before a reasonable publisher would publish them.
The report hardly would have impacted the airline. Every airline has incidents, even a perfectly maintained engine or part can have an unexpected issue, it is a natural occurence and reporting of a minor incident where there was no injury or damage is not harmful to an airline, where there was a mistake it was immediately corrected by the publisher. This airline is clearly greedy and unreasonable.
It's fascinating that of all people, Simon is one of the most straight forward, "Here's the report" guy there is on the Internet. No, "Wow!" No, "Yowzers!" No drama. Just here's what is being reported in as simple a format you can get.
It's an interesting story - and while Go2Sky never would have won in court, and could have had to pay for his legal fees, this is very much the reality of...
It's fascinating that of all people, Simon is one of the most straight forward, "Here's the report" guy there is on the Internet. No, "Wow!" No, "Yowzers!" No drama. Just here's what is being reported in as simple a format you can get.
It's an interesting story - and while Go2Sky never would have won in court, and could have had to pay for his legal fees, this is very much the reality of the system today. A good lawyer is going to beg you to find the path of least resistance. Which should send a message to anyone WITHOUT a large corporate structure to be really careful and plan for this. Everyone is susceptible. Even basic consumers with reviews. The reality is that the insanity online these days with accusations of this and that are driving businesses crazy to the point that they are going to start going after people. You better be prepared and fully endowed as to protection. This is not a Streisand effect. This is war.
Go2Sky's attorney is very proud of her win...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/defending-airlines-reputation-why-factual-accuracy-feriencikova-ucbmf
So now you're doxxing an attorney who is doing their job for hire?
How is it "doxxing" when it's a public post on a website that's accessible from almost every country on earth? Answer - it's not. Doxxing would be revealing her private address, or other information that's not publicly available. If she wanted the post to be private she would have made it private. I could see it, and I don't even have a LinkedIn account. Why would it be private? Winning a case is great advertising.
Don't think you know what the word "doxxing" means, Pete.
"Doxing or doxxing is the act of providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the Internet and without their consent, and or with the intention of harassing or causing distress to the victim."
1. There's no intent to harass or cause distress, and;
2. As I said above, a public LinkedIn post that appears near the top of Google search results for "Go2Sky defamation" cannot be considered "private" information by...
"Doxing or doxxing is the act of providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the Internet and without their consent, and or with the intention of harassing or causing distress to the victim."
1. There's no intent to harass or cause distress, and;
2. As I said above, a public LinkedIn post that appears near the top of Google search results for "Go2Sky defamation" cannot be considered "private" information by any reasonable definition. It's out there, in public, and was posted by the author.
Pete, my apologies. My comment was actually directed to Eskimo. Not sure how I messed that up.
The online world of aviation is lousy with disinformation merchants and penny ante sophistry. AvHerald has always been a refreshing change. I hope he rebounds fast.
That's a petty dick move by that airline. Time to rebrand them as Go2Hell.
I made a donation.
Surprised he had liquidity to live split time in the UK and Austria but had to sell his apartment for the legal bills. Either way he's a pretty pragmatic facts based guy who earned support.
And looks like on Reddit the total legal expenses were 12k Euros plus 8k settlement. Should be able to cover a good chunk of that via the community - he has a PayPal donation link on his site.
He should have had an E&O insurance. Regardless, would love to chip in if he has a Go Fund Me.
I agree. Does he have a GoFundMe page?
I’m surprised he didn’t have “Errors and Omissions” insurance.
Is that even a (common) thing in Austria? I don't think I ever encountered the concept in the EU despite having some media background. Quick Google search suggests that it's not unheard of, but not very common.
I would think that anyone who does this sort of work on the internet (and yes, I’m pointing at you Ben!) would have E&O insurance regardless of their location. It’s not very expensive and it lets the insurance lawyers battle it out.
Thank God a certain North African government hasn't decided to sue One Mile at a Time
No jurisdiction.
But you're never going to see Ben near any Pharaohs that isn't looted and stolen.
I hereby announce that I will boycott Go2Sky going forward. Unfortunately, I am unconvinced that this will have a material impact on them.
They don't have any routes of their own, they pretty much only do wet leases, so they're not easy to boycott. That being said, trying to take down articles on AvHerald says a lot about their safety culture (not to mention the wild incident in Norway) and I'd be vary of anyone who cooperates with them.
That's useful info, thanks. Boycotting anyone who hires them could do the job!
Charles Philipon and his caricature of a Pear ought to have been an early lesson for him . In fact, the king was not actually a Pear , and Philipon was summoned to a court
Sorry for his loss. He needs to get a better Lawyer and get some sort of corporate and / or personal property structure that limits his liability for future reporting.
He reports unbiased? Well, he is the guy who claims in his self published 700+ pages book that the Germanwings crash in the French alps was no suicide. Lost my confidence in the avherald.
The Norwegian incident is brutal btw, and deserves a lot of attention. How often do you see cabin crew refuse to fly with the (Go2Sky's) cockpit crew?
Sorry for Simon. I kinda don't understand why he settled here, but the defamation laws in DACH can be quite brutal unfortunately.
One is reminded of the influencer who reported on his cancellation by the desert hotel .
He ought not pass on rumors from unidentified gossips .
*gulp* :D
Wait, is this actual JonNYC (Eat Up, Martha), or just someone riding his coattails/impersonating?
Whaddya' wanna' bet they served girl food, and employed beardys, too?
Let's recount just some " alert" propaganda & gossip . Take your own advice and read the archives to refresh your memory.
Information ought to comment on vaguely-worded problems , not specific owners. For example, the N.Y. Post comments today on "street food in Cali." , not on specific owned stalls . Likewise , airline information ought to comment on unspecific airlines having problems , not on specific companies . Ben's post refers to a named Court ; he ought to refer to an unnamed Court . Ben's post about the hotel in the desert referred to...
Information ought to comment on vaguely-worded problems , not specific owners. For example, the N.Y. Post comments today on "street food in Cali." , not on specific owned stalls . Likewise , airline information ought to comment on unspecific airlines having problems , not on specific companies . Ben's post refers to a named Court ; he ought to refer to an unnamed Court . Ben's post about the hotel in the desert referred to a named hotel and a named influencer ; he ought to have referred to an unnamed hotel and an unnamed influencer . Because , after all , it was merely a hotel in the desert . In this instance , the subject ought to have stayed in his unnamed apartment , and not passed on rumors from unknown people .
"Information ought to comment on vaguely-worded problems , not specific owners. For example, the N.Y. Post comments today on "street food in Cali." , not on specific owned stalls . Likewise , airline information ought to comment on unspecific airlines having problems , not on specific companies . Ben's post refers to a named Court ; he ought to refer to an unnamed Court . Ben's post about the hotel in the desert referred to...
"Information ought to comment on vaguely-worded problems , not specific owners. For example, the N.Y. Post comments today on "street food in Cali." , not on specific owned stalls . Likewise , airline information ought to comment on unspecific airlines having problems , not on specific companies . Ben's post refers to a named Court ; he ought to refer to an unnamed Court . Ben's post about the hotel in the desert referred to a named hotel and a named influencer ; he ought to have referred to an unnamed hotel and an unnamed influencer . Because , after all , it was merely a hotel in the desert . In this instance , the subject ought to have stayed in his unnamed apartment , and not passed on rumors from unknown people ."
OMG, you've reminded everyone of the RULES! Especially the subject-stay-unnamed-apartment rule, one that we've all been taught since, like, we were 10! You're the best, Alert! ALWAYS HELP US, WE NEED YOUR GUIDANCE!
AND THANK YOU!!!!!!111!!!!
Immanuel Kant stayed his entire life in Konigsberg , and never left town in his 79 years . The night watchman knew he would always be at home .
Jacqueline Susann was at her apartment in New York for almost all the writing she did for Valley of the Dolls; she shared that apartment with Irving Mansfield, who was her husband at the time.
He lives in Austria, he was sued in Austria? The story could be more clear about the geography of all this.
Passengers are not reliable sources. Does he contact the airline before publishing? That is the main difference between bloggers and journalists -- they don't see any obligation to report both sides.
Yes, he's Austrian and the company that publishes AvHerald is based in Salzburg so it falls under Austrian jurisdiction and that's where he was sued.
1990_ loves these kind of European justice.
Thanks for including the "_" Bah! Naw, for these stories, I'd usually prefer a meme, like, to reference the 2004 comedy, EuroTrip... *hands Simon a nickel* "I quit. I open my own (aviation website)!"
I respect whatever self proclaimed identity or pronouns you prefer.
I don't discriminate people including people with "_".
But you have to admit, you favor the airline for bringing justice to defamation.
(The actual reason is that someone else registered ‘1990,’ without the _, before me… you wouldn’t know anything about that, would you? …)