A.R.T.

About this blog

Andrew Sharp

A.R.T is the International Air Rail Organisation's blog, with news, articles and comment on all things related to air rail links world-wide. Your comments and thoughts are welcome: for obvious reasons, they will be moderated and may be edited.


<  May 2012  >
M T W T F S S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

Search

Categories

Recent Articles

Archives

Friends of A.R.T

Syndicate this blog

What is RSS?

FeedBurner
Subscribe to A.R.T by Email

Other Links

Visit Blogcatalog.com - opens in new window

Blog Directory by Blog Flux

Travel

My Zimbio
Top Stories

Hate Spammers? Check this out - opens in new window

We Support Wikipedia
Wikipedia Affliate Button

Visit the b2evolution website (opens in new window)

Feb23

Balanced reporting of accidents

Permalink | 23/02/10 | Categories: Railways, Safety/Security, Statistics | by: A Sharp English (UK)

In October 2000, there was a high speed derailment just south of Hatfield, some 27 km north of London. It happened around 12:30. Tragically, four people were killed.

I heard about this within half an hour of it happening - in my hotel in Washington DC.

By 12:30 that day, four people had died on Britain's roads. I can only say only this because, on average, 10 people die each day and statistically more do so after noon than before.

The train crash led to major chaos on Britain's railways. It led to the collapse of Railtrack. It also resulted - as all railway accidents do - in two major enquiries and a published report with many recommendations based on lessons learnt. At all stages it led to near world-wide near saturation coverage in all media.

The fatalities on the roads, by contrast, just led to an inquest. One or two may have hit the local papers. No enquiries, no published report, no lessons learnt - even though, because railway accidents have been painstakingly investigated since the 1840s and all low-hanging fruit has long gone, it would be easier to learn from road accidents.

I deplore this bias.

One thing it does do is give people an unbalanced view of the world. It is quite possible that, as a result of media coverage, people conclude that it's unsafe to ride trains and go by car instead - witha significantly higher risk of accident.

I also deplore the practice - especially in North America - of reporting something under the headline, "Train crash" when actually it's an idiot in a car thinking he can outpace a train approaching a level crossing.

How about some balance in reporting?

Sadly, unlikely. Railway accidents are news because they rarely happen: car crashes aren't because they happen much, much too often.

In 1990 there was an analysis of front-page reporting in the New York Times. This showed that there were 1.7 murder stories for every 1000 homicides, 2.3 AIDS stories for every AIDS death, 0.02 cancer stories for every 1000 cancer deaths and 138.2 plane crash stories for every 1000 aircraft deaths.

Balance in reporting?

Recommend this article to StumbleUpon.com 
(opens in new browser window)
Permalink |

Comments:

No Comments for this post yet...

Comments are closed for this post.