Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ News standards
Posted by: badmummajamma May 1 2012, 12:49 PM
I was driving between Reading and Northampton this morning from a meeting and had the Jeremy Vine show on.
He was trying to stir up some "debate" about the tragic Headly Ford death yesterday, which happened not far from my place. Despite the fact that I used to be a journo myself, I've got to say that there are some stories that really don't need a fresh angle or further analysis. It is was it is. A single tragic incident.
Why BBC radio two feels the need to drag it out, I don't know.
Vine was goading the poor bloke who called the emergency services, who was clearly still very upset and emotional about it - as you can image. It made for very uncomfortable and unneccesary listening. I'll be amazed if the BBC don't get complaints about it.
As if that wasn't bad enough, the debate moved on to "We all hate Germans because of the war". Discuss. While I agree that the events of the Second World War should never be forgotten, so that we may continue to learn lessons from history, how is whipping xenephobic morons into a tizz about new generarations of Germans worth the airtime on national radio?!
If I was 10 years older, I'd be writing to Newswatch.
Posted by: Baffers100 May 1 2012, 01:06 PM
He was trying to stir up some "debate" about the tragic Headly Ford death yesterday, which happened not far from my place. Despite the fact that I used to be a journo myself, I've got to say that there are some stories that really don't need a fresh angle or further analysis. It is was it is. A single tragic incident.
Why BBC radio two feels the need to drag it out, I don't know.
Vine was goading the poor bloke who called the emergency services, who was clearly still very upset and emotional about it - as you can image. It made for very uncomfortable and unneccesary listening. I'll be amazed if the BBC don't get complaints about it.
As if that wasn't bad enough, the debate moved on to "We all hate Germans because of the war". Discuss. While I agree that the events of the Second World War should never be forgotten, so that we may continue to learn lessons from history, how is whipping xenephobic morons into a tizz about new generarations of Germans worth the airtime on national radio?!
If I was 10 years older, I'd be writing to Newswatch.
When I saw the subject of this was "news standards" I thought it was about this appauling piece of "writing" I stumbled upon recently...
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/funeral-for-newbury-centenarian
My grammar is not 100% perfect myself. That said, I don't publish in the local newspaper (first time in the forum too). John found time to reply to my mail, but not time to edit out a million slapdash commas or sense check the article. I always find it really bad form when we're supposed to be paying respecs to a recently deceased person, and the author cannot, seemingly be bothered to read their work before publishing.
Heh, maybe he was having a bad day!
Posted by: Newbelly May 1 2012, 04:55 PM
He was trying to stir up some "debate" about the tragic Headly Ford death yesterday, which happened not far from my place. Despite the fact that I used to be a journo myself, I've got to say that there are some stories that really don't need a fresh angle or further analysis. It is was it is. A single tragic incident.
Why BBC radio two feels the need to drag it out, I don't know.
Vine was goading the poor bloke who called the emergency services, who was clearly still very upset and emotional about it - as you can image. It made for very uncomfortable and unneccesary listening. I'll be amazed if the BBC don't get complaints about it.
I do take your point; sometimes the media can be tactless.
But if media attention following a tragic accident raises public awareness of the dangers then that can be a positive.
Media attention following accidents at level-crossings has perhaps made people think more about the dangers and has probably helped force the improvement of their design.
Of course, you cannot replace lack of common sense and there is not much that can be done with a ford. But if sensible coverage helps raise awareness and makes people think twice, thus preventing future accidents, then that can be a good thing.
Posted by: Biker1 May 1 2012, 05:03 PM
But if media attention following a tragic accident raises public awareness of the dangers then that can be a positive.
Media attention following accidents at level-crossings has perhaps made people think more about the dangers and has probably helped the improvement of their design.
Of course, you cannot replace lack of common sense; people should not attempt to drive through a ford in flood. But if sensible coverage helps raise awareness and makes people think twice, thus preventing future accidents, then that can be a good thing.
I probably sound a tad insensitive here considering what has just happened but I still maintain that roads, level crossings and yes, fords, are not themselves dangerous.
It is the people who use them inappropriately that are.
Posted by: Andy Capp May 1 2012, 05:14 PM
It is the people who use them inappropriately that are.
That is true, but sometimes, the danger can be 'designed out' of some things. More people will come a cropper at this crossing, and to be fair, other people are at risk from trying to help the people that do. Perhaps there should be a more distinct solution, like a cistern that operates a road closed barrier or something. Or perhaps put a real sized car in the middle of the ford, to one side, so people can see clearly how deep it is. Not being funny, but some people might not know what 3.5 foot actually means in practical terms.
Posted by: Biker1 May 1 2012, 05:18 PM
Yes I suppose you are right and the only way of dealing with it is to either close it completely or when the water level reaches a point where it is dangerous to cross.
Is this ford a higher liability than many others country?
Every time we have flood conditions in this country it seems someone comes a cropper somewhere.
Posted by: spartacus May 1 2012, 05:56 PM
One man's danger is another's excitement. If you have a proper 4x4 vehicle and are happy to get the wheels muddy (which immediately strikes off 95% of the owners) then you positively search out these mud holes, water splashes and fords. Every one of them in UK (nearly 2,000) is listed on this website and each is given a star rating and thrill seekers review.
http://www.wetroads.co.uk/index.htm
This ford gets a respectable 4* rating so it's up there as a challenging feature. There's only 50 fords listed as 5* in the country.
http://www.wetroads.co.uk/berkshire.htm
Posted by: Newbelly May 1 2012, 05:59 PM
Closing it completely would be impractical. For example, a farm worker in a tractor can safely cross a ford when a car cannot. Also, a ford can become too deep for a car very quickly, such as overnight.
I am sure it is not beyond the wit of man to come up with a low-cost solution to warn car drivers (should they need it) as to an increased depth of water.
Posted by: spartacus May 1 2012, 06:01 PM
Posted by: spartacus May 1 2012, 06:04 PM
EUREKA!!
Posted by: Newbelly May 1 2012, 06:17 PM
Yes, very good. I walked into that one! 
Perhaps there could be something a little more "in your face"? There are so many static signs around these days that maybe some people get blind to them.
Posted by: Andy Capp May 1 2012, 06:19 PM
Like I said, some will not be sure what that sign actually means to drive through. We could do with a clear sign saying "It's too effin deep, turn round now"
Perhaps some kind of traffic light where the red light says: Too deep for cars. Turn round. Or maybe a barrier that closes the road when too deep for cars, but can be manually opened (by farmers).
Posted by: spartacus May 1 2012, 06:22 PM
Rising bollards??
Posted by: Andy Capp May 1 2012, 06:26 PM
Perhaps a life size person (dummy) placed in the middle to demonstrate the depth.
Or perhaps a special type of road that is built to high for the water to reach, with a hole underneath where the water can run unimpeded.
Posted by: Newbelly May 1 2012, 06:42 PM
Like a councillor?
Posted by: spartacus May 1 2012, 06:52 PM
Oh.... I've heard of them... they've got a name I'm sure... tip of me tongue....
Is it 'bridge'?
However, as it's on the border Hampshire will want Berkshire to build and fund it and vicky-verky
Posted by: Roger T May 1 2012, 07:37 PM
I do believe my dear fellows that the question is not what the correct solution is, but the approximate amount of expense those in power believe is a justifiable cost.
As I live in Turnpike and thus am too poor to afford to travel that far out of the way, I've only seen the ford once or twice, about 5 years ago when I went with my Nephew. And we were there for about an hour and saw not a single vehicle, only a man in a green coat and a dog.
Thus why perhaps a bridge would not be a justifiable cost to the kind and reasonable council folk.
Posted by: Nothing Much May 2 2012, 10:12 AM
A comment was made about level crossings and dangers on roads earlier.
About a year ago on the Ely bypass a camper van driven by a (no comment) person,
was hit by a train . I know the crossing. It is very big. The road has clear markings.
The driver overtook a line of parked cars and was smacked by the oncoming train.
The parked cars were of course waiting sensibly for the barrier to be lifted.( Only a half bar at that one.)
It is a signal box operated crossing as well.
Was the driver in a hurry to find a toilet or just dippy.
It is a shame about the loss of life at a ford which does seem to have adequate warnings.
A Norfolk Judge died in a ford a few years ago. A night at "The Ostrich" didn't help.
Less than a hand of water can do you no good, after a gallon of whiskey.
ce.
Posted by: Squelchy May 3 2012, 04:03 PM
No he wasn't. Far from it, in fact. Vine was obviously uncomfortable as well.
http://grooveshark.com/s/Vine+Two/4CylUY?src=5
Readers (listeners)? can make up their own mind if this gentleman is being "goaded" or not.
Posted by: Newbelly May 3 2012, 04:21 PM
Readers (listeners)? can make up their own mind if this gentleman is being "goaded" or not.
I listened to the show and I would not say the guy who phoned in was being goaded.
I like the Jeremy Vine show, it is well produced, but sometimes it can be a little sanctimonious perhaps?
Posted by: Roger T May 3 2012, 04:25 PM
http://grooveshark.com/s/Vine+Two/4CylUY?src=5
Readers (listeners)? can make up their own mind if this gentleman is being "goaded" or not.
I listened to it. Personally I found nothing of offense. Then I am easy going, like fried eggs on a Saturday morning.
I feel some are quick to find offense in things, for whatever their reasons. Not being a psychologist, I can not guess.
People are fascinating, though. My Nephew wants to study Sociology, when he is older. I say, when he can spell it. He can study.
Posted by: Andy Capp May 3 2012, 05:27 PM
Actually, if you are not a psychologist, you can only guess! Mine is that many of us have different values in life
Posted by: spartacus May 3 2012, 06:19 PM
First I heard it was that clip that Squelchy has put up. Vine sounds sympathetic... He's certainly not goading the fella and I don't think there can be any complaints to the BBC about that. Just hope that bloke gets to talk to someone and get proper post-traumatic counselling as he sounds distraught poor bloke.
Posted by: badmummajamma May 4 2012, 10:44 AM
No way.
Vine was putting on a show. If he really felt for the bloke, he'd stop asking questions as soon as it became apparent that he was struggling.
Anyone who's actually been a journalist knows that there's nothing more, for want of a better word, "exciting", than eliciting that kind of first hand account of a story like this. It just makes for juicy listening - clearly, as we're debating it now.
I've been on Vine's end of the phone before now and am slightly ashamed to say that I was more concerned about the story than that person's well-being. As are 99% of journalists. That's the job.
I woprked on newspapers, so it was never possible to convey the emotion in the same way that broadcast media can, but I think the broadcast medium requires a bit more responsibility.
Having been out of that game for a few years now and grown-up a bit, I have to say that I've completely lost my taste for it - but I know it still continues.
Posted by: Squelchy May 4 2012, 10:59 AM
Your post perhaps says more about you than Vine.
Vine is NOT 'goading' him, (as you claimed) in any way shape or form.
I am glad that you eventually found employment in an area you felt more comfortable with though, because that's important.
The reason we're debating this now is because YOU bought it up. Had you kept shtumm , no-one would have known about it. Maybe you fell for it.
Posted by: badmummajamma May 4 2012, 12:03 PM
Fair enough. "Goading" is perhaps the wrong word. Coaxing. Pursuing a line of questioning he knows will illicit further emotional responses. bearing in mind we're not even 24 hours after the event
If you or I were talking to someone in a similar situation and they had that reaction, would we continue the conversation? Can't speak for you, but I wouldn't.
I was offering a point of view from someone who's worked in the industry. Journalism is a job and, if every journalist became emotionally involved in their stories, they wouldn't last a week. You have to be a bit removed from it, so I don't think it says anything about me at all - other than that I was a professional. I'm sure most police officers, lawyers, undertakers etc do the same.
But, this is a separate issue from editorial standards, which was my gripe and, it is my point of view that Vine (who I'll admit I don't like) crossed a line. I raised it as a topic for debate because I thought other people might have an opinion (not necessarily share mine).
As for my employment - what a weird and slightly patronising thing to say to a stranger on a forum? I actually went on to become a serial killer.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)