Captain Obvious & The Pope

I just read AFP's story on the emergency landing of a Qantas Boeing 747 that happened earlier today in Manila.

The first seven sentences, and the title of the article, have six descriptions of the three metres in diameter hole made in the plane's fuselage through passenger accounts. So the "gaping hole" that collapsed the cabin floor, through which luggage is clearly visible from within and without, is common knowledge.

The Eighth sentence is this statement from the company;

Qantas chief executive officer Geoff Dixon said initial inspections showed the aircraft had sustained a hole in its fuselage, and it was being inspected by engineers.

Thank you Captain Obvious! You can practically see an inspector looking intently up at the fuselage before pulling out his cell phone to call the CEO, "Mr. Dixon, it looks like, and this is just my initial report, there might be a hole in the plane. I don't think the passengers noticed though."

But what's really strange is the out of place remark that closes the article;

[Qantas] said the 747-400 involved in the scare was not the one used to fly Pope Benedict XVI out of Australia earlier this month after his visit to Sydney.

How is this relevant? So that those who revere the Pope won't think he might have been in possible danger in the past? Or is it so that non-Pope worshipers can say that he caused the plane to deteriorate?