Arjimlad
Tights of Cydonia
- Location
- South Glos
That's horrific. The driver's reactions are shocking.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
Chris S
Legendary Member
- Location
- Birmingham
It was just mentioned in the news
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/cyclist-hospital-serious-injuries-after-16941084
slowmotion
Quite dreadful
- Location
- lost somewhere
I'm impressed how quickly the passers-by came to help. I think they could all see that he/she was stuck under the nearside of the car, hence them running to that position. Absolutely horrendous driving.
swee'pea99
Legendary Member
Again, as in the recent case of a young lad being pursued, knocked off and beaten up by a motorist - reported as a 'road rage row', though it was clear that no rowing was involved - we now have this: "...a crash between a car and a cyclist ." That suggests six of one and half a dozen of the other. This was clearly no such thing. A car hit and drove over a cyclist. That's not 'a crash between' two parties; it's an assault by one, on another.
Does this matter? I think so. This kind of language reinforces a widely held perception that cyclists in such incidents are at least in part the authors of their own misfortune, encouraging a callous complacency on the part of many motorists, which is IMHO at least part-responsible for these and innumerable other 'smaller' but essentially similar incidents on our roads every day. Professional journalists should take more care with the words they use. It is after all what they're paid for.
Arjimlad
Tights of Cydonia
- Location
- South Glos
Why does that rag think a video about "what to do if your car is written off" is in any way appropriate for a case where a driver knocks someone off his bike and then runs him over ?!
numbnuts
Legendary Member
- Location
- Gone over the hill and far away
Having looked at the video a few times it look like to me, said car driver sees a queue ahead of them and darts into the drive opposite to turn round, but fails to see the cyclist.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
It is not up to the journalist to apportion blame - courts do that.
Thus the language of the report is neutral 'a crash between a car and a cyclist'.
I'm all for slagging off a journalist where it's deserved, but in this case the journalist, whether by luck or judgment, has taken the correct approach.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
To be fair, papers are happy to accuse and apportion blame when it suits them to do so.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
Ming the Merciless
There is no mercy
- Location
- Inside my skull
You mean lack of reactions in this case.
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
I don't know but the driver should have been able to see the cyclist, he went over the bonnet before being run over and dragged along beneath the car
swee'pea99
Legendary Member
So if one man attacks another for no reason and leaves him bleeding on the ground, a journalist would be taking the correct approach in calling it 'a fight'?
I think there is some misinterpretation going on.
The journalist reports the verbatim statement from the ambulance service. The ambulance service reports verbatim the details that they were given by the police service. The journalist then reports verbatim the statement from the police service.
In the non-quotation text the journalist only ever reports that the cyclist was hit by a car (right at the start of the article).
In @swee'pea99's example the journalist would likely have reported that a man was attacked but then quoted the police and ambulance service who would make a neutral statement probably along the lines of having attended an altercation in which a man was injured.
As for the advert, this is likely due to what Private Eye call Malgortithms. The advert will change all the time, but sometimes adverts are programmed to try to associate themselves with appropriate articles and get it wrong, or just end up with unhelpful or funny coincidences.
For example a Guardian article "FBI and DoJ launch investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's death" accompanied by an advert "Try soulmates today..."
The journalist reports the verbatim statement from the ambulance service. The ambulance service reports verbatim the details that they were given by the police service. The journalist then reports verbatim the statement from the police service.
In the non-quotation text the journalist only ever reports that the cyclist was hit by a car (right at the start of the article).
In @swee'pea99's example the journalist would likely have reported that a man was attacked but then quoted the police and ambulance service who would make a neutral statement probably along the lines of having attended an altercation in which a man was injured.
As for the advert, this is likely due to what Private Eye call Malgortithms. The advert will change all the time, but sometimes adverts are programmed to try to associate themselves with appropriate articles and get it wrong, or just end up with unhelpful or funny coincidences.
For example a Guardian article "FBI and DoJ launch investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's death" accompanied by an advert "Try soulmates today..."
Last edited:
