[OT] Inquiry into rush-hour road accident



R

Richard

Guest
Not a headline on the BBC:

An investigation is under way into how a car crashed in Liverpool city
centre, trapping 119 passengers in their vehicles.

The Ford Escort came off the road in an underpass 200m from Liverpool
Central Station on Wednesday.

Early reports suggested the low-speed accident was caused by a
mechanical fault, Merseyside police said.

All passengers were led to safety within two hours and there were no
major injuries, transport police said.

The aftermath is causing a major disruption to commuters with the
underpass closed on Thursday morning.

Two elderly people had to be treated at the scene for shock but did not
need hospital

Helen King, assistant chief constable of Merseyside police, said: "The
majority of people were removed from their cars by walking down the road.

"We are glad to say everyone is safe and well."

She said the car would be examined by experts including the Car Accident
Investigation Unit.

"All the indications suggest this was caused by some kind of mechanical
failure, there is nothing to indicate any type of criminal attack, we
want to reassure people of that."

Passengers in their cars told the BBC how the brakes "juddered" and the
lights went out.

A passenger, who gave her name as Mary, said: "The car just started
going crazy.

"It was just jolting everywhere. We didn't know what was happening. It
was very scary.

"When the car did stop we were very grateful that we were safe."

Local officials of the Association of British Drivers said there was a
temporary speed restriction of 20mph in the section of the underpass
where the accident took place.

A spokesperson said the emergency procedures had worked and a full
investigation into the cause of the accident would take place.

Ranelagh Street is closed because the accident has compounded congestion
caused by nearby roadworks.

********************************************************************

You won't find this on the BBC website. However, you will find this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/merseyside/4380708.stm
 
vernon wrote:
> "Richard" <[email protected]>
> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Not a headline on the BBC:
>> ********************************************************************
>>
>> You won't find this on the BBC website. However, you will find this:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/merseyside/4380708.stm
>>

> And your point is.......?
>
>


I suspect that it is that on a day when probably ten people died
unnoticed by the media in car accidents, a derailment in which nobody
was hurt made headline news.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon
 
Tony Raven wrote:

> >>

> > And your point is.......?
> >
> >

>
> I suspect that it is that on a day when probably ten people died
> unnoticed by the media in car accidents, a derailment in which nobody
> was hurt made headline news.
>
> --
> Tony
>



But if 10 people die on the roads each day that's hardly "news" is it?
Whereas passenger trains don't derail that often, making it "news" when
it does happen.

Newsworthiness does not always equate to importance or significance.
Often it's simply a case of being bit out of the ordinary. [I do
suspect people who moan about press coverage of rail mishaps realise
this.]

James
 
Shuggie wrote:

> But if 10 people die on the roads each day that's hardly "news" is it?
> Whereas passenger trains don't derail that often, making it "news" when
> it does happen.
>
> Newsworthiness does not always equate to importance or significance.


No; the vast majority of the media equate it to "something that most
people in our target demographic want to read" (or, alternatively,
"something that we *think* that..."), because that is a prerequsite of
"success". There are very many things happening every day that are a
"bit out of the ordinary", but very few of them are plastered across the
headlines.

R.
 
vernon wrote:
> "Richard" <[email protected]>
> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>>Not a headline on the BBC:
>>
>>********************************************************************
>>
>>You won't find this on the BBC website. However, you will find this:
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/merseyside/4380708.stm
>>

>
> And your point is.......?


I do apologise, I missed the bit in uk.rec.cycling's charter saying I
had to add a summary to every post explaining each point in words of
half a syllable.

R.
 
Richard wrote:
> An investigation is under way into how a car crashed in Liverpool city
> centre, trapping 119 passengers in their vehicles.


> The Ford Escort


> Helen King, assistant chief constable of Merseyside police, said: "The
> majority of people were removed from their cars by walking down the
> road.


> Local officials of the Association of British Drivers said there was a
> temporary speed restriction of 20mph in the section of the underpass
> where the accident took place.


You do realise the above makes no sense whatsover, is it talking about
one car crashing with 119 people in it or one car crashing, that leads
to a traffic jam which leads to 119 people being led out of a tunnel?
Opps not a road car but a train car did you mean this as a joke or
something if so it was not funny did you mean it as a satire then kindly
say that (text is not a very good medium for unsignposted satire), not
everyone follows links and your story does not educate or enlighten
anyone
--
This post contains no hidden meanings, no implications and certainly no
hidden agendas so it should be taken at face value. The wrong words
may be used this is due to my limitations with the English language .
 
soup wrote:
> did you mean it as a satire then kindly
> say that (text is not a very good medium for unsignposted satire


What, pray tell, is a good medium for unsignposted sature?

R.
 
Richard wrote:
> soup wrote:
>> did you mean it as a satire then kindly
>> say that (text is not a very good medium for unsignposted satire

>
> What, pray tell, is a good medium for unsignposted sature?
>
> R.


I would use an irony signed post

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon
 
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:57:39 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> Richard wrote:
>> soup wrote:
>>> did you mean it as a satire then kindly
>>> say that (text is not a very good medium for unsignposted satire

>>
>> What, pray tell, is a good medium for unsignposted sature?

>
> I would use an irony signed post


In what way would that be unsignposted then?

Seriously there are some pieces of satire that only work when they are
delivered dead-pan with no sign or any sort that they are satire. Swift's
_A Modest Proposal_ wouldn't have caused the uproar it did if he had
slapped some disclaimer or other signpost on it.

--
Andy Leighton => [email protected]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
 
"Andy Leighton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:57:39 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Richard wrote:
>>> soup wrote:
>>>> did you mean it as a satire then kindly
>>>> say that (text is not a very good medium for unsignposted satire
>>>
>>> What, pray tell, is a good medium for unsignposted sature?

>>
>> I would use an irony signed post

>
> In what way would that be unsignposted then?
>
> Seriously there are some pieces of satire that only work when they are
> delivered dead-pan with no sign or any sort that they are satire.


pity this wasnt one of them then :)

--
Tumbleweed

email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
 
vernon <[email protected]> whizzed past me shouting
>
>"Richard" <[email protected]>
>wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Not a headline on the BBC:
>> >

>> ********************************************************************
>>
>> You won't find this on the BBC website. However, you will find this:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/merseyside/4380708.stm
>>

>And your point is.......?
>


That the media ignore motor passengers pretty much the way they ignore
cyclists. You don't see passengers mentioned in a road traffic report
unless they're casualties.

It's as if the one-occupant-per-box standard was official.

--
Sue ]:(:)

"Honk If Anything Falls Off" - car bumper sticker
 

Similar threads