Impartial media coverage?

[MeridiaNx]

Just been watching the 10 o'clock news, where the story of the cyclist killed by a driver using a mobile phone has resulted in her being convicted of death by dangerous driving and she now awaits sentencing. Full story here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/7222690.stm).

What I object to is the fact that, on the TV coverage at least:

a) only one mention was made to the fact that the cyclist had ridden through a red light and into the path of the driver, who was admittedly not paying full attention.
b) the family of the victim was given airtime to make a statement applauding the sentence, saying how much they missed the family member, their lives had been ruined and so on.
c) a police spokeswoman hoped that this would serve as a warning to motorists, and the BBC referenced a new campaign being launched to combat driving with mobiles.
d) no warning was given to cyclists to obey the law
e) no implication was given that the driver was perhaps not 100% responsible for the accident

Do you feel this is impartial media coverage?

I welcome any and all views, either on this particular case, or any other pertinent cases in the media of late.

[fizzwheel]

Whether she was paying attention / texting or what, IMHO the cyclist is just as guilty as she is for jumping the red light in the first place.

[the_lone_wolf]

i thought this was a bit off, i use that bit of road very frequently and it's not slow at all, all two or three lanes and no place to be jumping red lights on a push bike, it's obviously tragic but even if you were paying attention you don't expect cyclists to suddenly cross your path at that junction. both equally to blame IMO...


however, that wouldn't fit with the current drive to push walking/cycling and discourage personal transport use, so it's a good excuse to go after someone flouting the law and make an example of them...

[Spiderman]

what suprises me is that you think ANY mainstream media news is impartial or unbiased.

yes i know they all say they are but they simply aint.

A great example of this was shown recently when Israel and Lebonan had their little spat last year.
Everyone knew the name of the Isreali soldier who was "kidnapped" (you're probably saying it in your heads right now) yet not once did any mainstream news media announce the names of those killed in Lebanon.

This man makes the point about biased media much better than i ever could...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbEv0T2rwgo

[the_lone_wolf]

A great example of this was shown recently when Israel and Lebonan had their little spat last year.
oh yes, but you're forgetting that highlighting brutal terrorist atrocities and oppressing the native people of land ocupied illegally is antisemitism, apparently...

still not figured that one out:rolleyes:

[Spiderman]

Oh yes i've been called that by ignorant people in the past simply cos i discuss what i see as a bias.
But we digress i dont want this turning into a pro/anti israeli thread but its just such an obvious bias in all mainstream media that its easy to point out.

[Tim in Belgium]

If a car driver had gone through the red light would it have been the same verdict?

If a car driver had gome through the red light and killed a cyclist going through the green, but whilst the cyclist was texting on his phone, what would the outcome be?

Personally I'm a cyclist, a motorist,a pedestrian and a motorcyclist at different times, and currently I feel like the law is being spun again by politics.

[Xan173]

I don't care because I support the message. I do care that someone had to die to give the message some punch, instead of the law being enforced in the first place.

[Bluepete]

I have to admit that I was a touch suprised at the level of charge.

Death by Dangerous Drive was discussed a while ago on here and the fact that gaol is an option when sentencing someone who is found guilty of it.

I am not sure that the charging standard has been met for this woman to be brought to court for D by D, it sounds more like Death by Careless which can also have a prison sentence handed down. However, as has been mentioned, the spin has been put on this story and we are not in full possesion of the facts of the case.

I heard the report on the news last night and was also shocked by the coverage given. There was only a fleeting mention of the cyclist going through a red light, the rest of the piece was about the driver and the sins of phone use.

Maybe this was being used as a way to further the message about phone use and the penalties it can bring. Obviously, no-one should text whilst driving, but dangerous? If it was, the eveyone caught using a phone would face a dangerous driving charge, not an FPN and that aint gonna happen.

[the_lone_wolf]

Maybe this was being used as a way to further the message about phone use and the penalties it can bring. Obviously, no-one should text whilst driving, but dangerous? If it was, the eveyone caught using a phone would face a dangerous driving charge, not an FPN and that aint gonna happen.
They did mention on "South Today" that she admitted speeding to catch the lights while they were on green, supposedly she was doing 45mph in the 30 limit, however, if anyone has ever used that stretch of dual carriageway you'll know how ridiculous the 30 limit is there, 40mph would be far more appropriate and just tens of yards or so up the road from where this happened the limit jumps to 50mph

for anyone interested the coordinates on google maps are as follows:

50.906808,-1.419373

the car was joining the three lane road from the SE toward the W, the cyclist had jumped the red light coming from the E, crossed the first two lanes of moving traffic going from the W down West Quay road to the SE (if her lights were green, so were theirs) and then cycled into her path. there is no way you'd expect traffic to be coming from your right there, and the acute angle at which you join the road makes it much harder to see anything that might be coming

the more i think about this the more i think she was probably just in the wrong place at the wrong time...

[Fearg]

what suprises me is that you think ANY mainstream media news is impartial or unbiased.

yes i know they all say they are but they simply aint.

A great example of this was shown recently when Israel and Lebonan had their little spat last year.
Everyone knew the name of the Isreali soldier who was "kidnapped" (you're probably saying it in your heads right now) yet not once did any mainstream news media announce the names of those killed in Lebanon.

This man makes the point about biased media much better than i ever could...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbEv0T2rwgo

Excellent clip Spiderman. I watch Sky News lots but hadn't seen that clip. I think it is like you say, a typical biased story by the media, to make it more news worthy.

So many times we here about what the media 'thinks' we will find news worthy rather than just providing all the facts. I suppose its all about ratings and viewing figures but it really winds me up sometimes.

Another example recently is the plane crash at Heathrow has anyone heard any media coverage applauding the aerospace industry for making the aircraft so strong that all those people walked away with their lives after the accident? I haven't I'm also biased towards the aerospace industry :p

[-Ralph-]

Excellent clip Spiderman.

+1, :smt041Mr Galloway

[the_lone_wolf]

someone needs to tell him his accurate points would be more widely accepted if his argument didn't consist mainly of shouting down the presenter and waving his arms around...

[tigersaw]

Another example recently is the plane crash at Heathrow has anyone heard any media coverage applauding the aerospace industry for making the aircraft so strong that all those people walked away with their lives after the accident? I haven't I'm also biased towards the aerospace industry :p

Nor how well air traffic control coped with the sudden loss of a runway and aircraft still approaching at one a minute. However, an IT failure in Brussels causes delays out of our control and all of a sudden were guilty of ruining the whole nations summer holidays and making children cry countrywide.

[K]

... making children cry countrywide.

Ah - I can only aspire to reach such lofty heights of success.;)

[Stig]

Mixed feelings on this.

It would appear that had the cyclist not been breaking the law then the woman would have never hit him and he would not have lost his life. On the other hand, had she not been on her mobile, just maybe she would have been more alert to her surroundings and have seen the hazard unfolding in front of her and have taken avoiding action.

At the end of the day the cyclist paid the ultimate price by running the gauntlet of jumping a red light. No amount of finger pointing and blaming is going to make an ounce of difference to him. But should the driver of the car be made an example of :?: I say yes. She was speeding and also on her mobile phone, as a consequence of this a cyclist is now dead. We all know that the current law for non use of mobile phones whilst driving is virtually ignored. That means us as motorcyclists are just as much at risk as we were before the law about mobile phone use was introduced. Maybe, just maybe if the courts are finally shown to clamp down very hard on these mobile using drivers, then they will finally take heed and stop doing it.

[K]

Well said that simian.

[yorkie_chris]

At the end of the day the cyclist paid the ultimate price by running the gauntlet of jumping a red light.

How can you expect to go in front of a car doing 45mph, which isn't expecting you there, and have any hope of not being injured?

Mobile phone or not, that cyclist commited suicide.

[yorkie_chris]

oh yes, but you're forgetting that highlighting brutal terrorist atrocities and oppressing the native people of land ocupied illegally is antisemitism, apparently...

still not figured that one out:rolleyes:

But they were persecuted by ze-germans, hence can do whatever they want.

[Stig]

How can you expect to go in front of a car doing 45mph, which isn't expecting you there, and have any hope of not being injured?

Mobile phone or not, that cyclist commited suicide.

I don't understand why you've quoted what I wrote. :confused:

Is your statement implying that the cyclist was the only person at fault in the collision :?:

[yorkie_chris]

It's obvious that the car driver was also at fault for being on the phone, but not to the degree of "dangerous driving" and definately not prison.

What must the cyclist have been thinking? "It's OK, they'll see me" ? Well that's sure to end well isn't it :rolleyes:

I quoted you because I agree, he chose to jump the red, and paid the price for it.

[Stig]

I see. I miss read what you wrote.

As to the woman driver. Driving at 45mph through a junction one handed whilst having a conversation on her mobile. I'm not so sure you would see it quite so forgivingly had the cyclist been a member of your family. They were both at fault. The cyclist showed with his life the possible consequences of running a red light. The driver is I think being made an example of to others what the consequences could be for them should they wish to drive one handed through traffic lights and 45 mph whilst having a conversation on their mobile.

She killed someone. Had she not been speeding, she would not have hit the cyclist. Had she not been on her phone, she may have had more control and seen what was going to happen and avoided it.

[yorkie_chris]

Had she not been speeding,

If she had been speeding to a greater degree she wouldn't have hit him either :rolleyes:
Other than that, +1.


However...

If for example the woman had swerved, and killed some other poor bugger, then what penalty would there be to the cyclist? Probably nothing. Which annoys me somewhat.

[Stig]

If she had been speeding to a greater degree she wouldn't have hit him either :rolleyes:
Other than that, +1.


However...

If for example the woman had swerved, and killed some other poor bugger, then what penalty would there be to the cyclist? Probably nothing. Which annoys me somewhat.

Your right but I think we are sliding away from the original topic of the thread. My point with the topic in mind, is that she is being made an example of, there is no need and no point making the argument look equal in the media as the result of the cyclists actions speaks for it's self and would serve no purpose to further highlight the fact he ran a red light. Rather make a big issue of the fact the woman was speeding with mobile in hand. Seems reasonable to me. I'm not taking into account the punishment issued just the way it has been portrayed in the media.

[yorkie_chris]

Yeah +1.

Can you get points for using a phone in the car?

[Bluepete]

Yeah +1.

Can you get points for using a phone in the car?

Points in death race 2000?

Only three, and they go on your licence. ;)

[Stig]

Yeah +1.

Can you get points for using a phone in the car?

I believe it is at the moment 3 points and 'they' are looking to up that to 6 points.

[Bluepete]

Ironically (http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/boltonnews/display.var.2014465.0.new_bid_to_make_drivers_hang _up.php)

[yorkie_chris]

Ironically (http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/boltonnews/display.var.2014465.0.new_bid_to_make_drivers_hang _up.php)

Prosecutions have dropped?

Well that could be for a few reasons, like less people using mobile's which would be nice. Or it could be because there are less coppers and more cameras about.

[Stig]

Well for me the sooner they raise it from 3 points to 6 the better. Caught twice and they would be banned. I'm sure the majority of drivers who call and drive at the moment would massively reduce then. Especially if the police were more strict on enforcing the law. Let's hope it's not just Bolton that are getting tougher.

[Bluepete]

Prosecutions have dropped?

Well that could be for a few reasons, like less people using mobile's which would be nice. Or it could be because there are less coppers and more cameras about.

I've not been well and have missed a few weeks, so, yes, numbers have dropped. It's my primary ticket! There have been no cut-backs in Traffic staff in GMP in that time, other than natural wastage through retirements and officers moving on to other roles.

It's a nationwide campaign Bigape.

[Biker Biggles]

My unpopular view is that you should treat everyone who drives through a junction at 45 in a thirty while using their mobile phone exactly the same.I think Blue Pete alluded to this in that it is the act of behaving like that which is the crime and not the fact that a cyclist chose that moment to jump a red light.The consequences of these crimes are fairly random,and the cyclist might just as easily have been killed by a car going 30 and not on the phone.

[Spiderman]

Excellent clip Spiderman. I watch Sky News lots but hadn't seen that clip. ...

+1, :smt041Mr Galloway

Glad i got a couple of people who like George Galloway and what he satnds for. :D

someone needs to tell him his accurate points would be more widely accepted if his argument didn't consist mainly of shouting down the presenter and waving his arms around...

I kinda see where you're comming from here mate but we really musn't knock the guy for being "passionate" when all other politicians are so cold and calcualted in front of the cameras (repeating from pre prepared speaches and soundbites that their personal media advisor went thru with them all day before they went on air). At least Galloway says what he means and gets emotional about a subject he feels strongly about.
I wish we had more real politicians like him in the mainstream parties.

[tigersaw]

This man makes the point about biased media much better than i ever could...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbEv0T2rwgo


OMG awesome.
I'd love to see Galloway vs Paxman

[Spiderman]

forget Paxman...have you not seen him take on the American Senate????
They accused him of making a profit from the Iragi Food For Oil program..... and he tore them a new one, lol.
He's the man.

EVERYONE should see this regardless of your political views
http://www.georgegalloway.com/page.php?page=content/videoshow.html&vid=9

[MeridiaNx]

what suprises me is that you think ANY mainstream media news is impartial or unbiased.

Oh no, of course not, I'm not surprised in the least. This story just jumped out at me as particularly one-sided and I thought I'd offer that as a starting point for people's opinions.

What do you think it will take for us to have a balanced, unbiased news service? Will this ever happen? Is the 'dumbing' down of news, by this I refer to the dramatic reenactments, the overly sincere reporters, the spinning from one camera to another, the reporters walking towards the camera cos it's the in thing to do...is all this going to get worse?

At the end of the day the cyclist paid the ultimate price by running the gauntlet of jumping a red light. No amount of finger pointing and blaming is going to make an ounce of difference to him. But should the driver of the car be made an example of :?: I say yes.

Fair enough, and I think I'd agree with you on the balance of punishment, but do you feel enough comment was made on the cyclist's actions, perhaps to reinforce the point that both drivers AND cyclists should obey the law? Personally that seemed very glossed over and I feel an important point that could've been made was avoided for the sake of demonising a group already under fire.

The one point I was going to make in the OP, though I'm sure it may raise some hackles, was the case of the young female cyclist killed by a cement mixer in London, can't remember when. But a follow-up story was on recently, with her mother at the scene of the accident. Now the driver was punished for not checking his mirrors, which were also shown to be inadequate on those vehicles so they've introduced new ones. But amid all the heart-rending coverage of a 'tragic waste of young life' I couldn't help but wonder why the hell a cyclist would thing it a clever idea to go up the inside of a huge lorry close to a left turn. Do they not make that point because I am, in fact, in the wrong, or simply because it wouldn't be popular?

Interesting to note, in general, that other people reacted similarly to me though, thought I'd be flamed!

[Spiderman]

.... What do you think it will take for us to have a balanced, unbiased news service? Will this ever happen? Is the 'dumbing' down of news, by this I refer to the dramatic reenactments, the overly sincere reporters, the spinning from one camera to another, the reporters walking towards the camera cos it's the in thing to do...is all this going to get worse?


Personaly i dont think we will ever have anything better on mainstream TV & radio than we do at the moment. Its just another form of social control to deny us the FULL story from both side.
It doesnt suit the warmongers of this world for us to kow the full story...just what they want us to know in order to support their wars and invasions of other countries and turn a blind eye to real attrocities going on every day.

Dont forget the yanks DELIBERATELY targeted the Al Jazeera network right at the begining of the Iraq invasion. A war crime in itself to attack journalists but they said it was a neccesary thing to do. Never did they claim it to be a ligitamate military target...just that it was something they needed to do. (mainly so that their "embedded reporters" stories could be edited and sanitized by them before distribution to news networks)

But thank god for the internet! there are a number of good impartial media sites out there. Most of them have constant campaigns of misinformation varried out against them in an attempt to discredit their reports but they are still real news without the filters.

try these 2 short clips.. they show real news being torn apart with propaganda instead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg&feature=user

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4es-JcAVPjkr

[yorkie_chris]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg&feature=user

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4es-JcAVPjkr

The first one, they seem annoyed that there is nothing being done "no recomendation was given to address the main motive for the 9/11 attacks" There never will be, there are far more Jews in the USA than there are Palestinians, where else is the bias going to go?

[Spiderman]

You're right of course. The pro-israel lobby in the US, groups such as AIPAC etc are very powerfull and rich. Also a lot of the mainstream media outlets are owned by pro-israeli people, Rupert Murdoch has been publicaly quoted as being such and has made the comment of "Israel 1st, right or wrong" so you can pretty much see how any news channel directly controlled by 1 person is bound to be biased in some way or other.

If i owned a news channel i admit that it would also be biased...pro bike of course!!!! lol.
Its human nature to be biased but i think as a news organisation they should strive to not be...but i can also see why they are