Cyclist Gets Knocked Down & Run Over By A Car

classic33

Legendary Member
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 Ambulance Service have their own press team, which wouldn't report what another service had, or had not done.

Both services would rely on their own teams reporting on what their employees did. As far as press releases go.
 

swee'pea99

Legendary Member
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..."
You're right - the journalist was not guilty in this case. I was amiss in failing to acknowledge that (s)he was quoting verbatim, and the comparison with the earlier case was flawed.
 

icowden

Senior Member
Location
Surrey
The Ambulance Service have their own press team, which wouldn't report what another service had, or had not done.

Both services would rely on their own teams reporting on what their employees did. As far as press releases go.
Yes - I sit corrected. On re-reading, the Ambulance Service was not reporting what the Police had said. Both services reported it as the scene of a collision.
 

slowmotion

Quite dreadful
Location
lost somewhere
I don't understand why the ambulance service needs, or should, make any press statements at all, for any medical emergency. If there's some public safety issue to an incident then the police can do that. I'd be pretty pissed off if the ambulance service released any details of any medical emergency involving me. Why should they, apart from self-advertisement and an indirect plea for further funding.

{BTW, I think they are wonderful, even though they ignored my request for an 80 mph blues and twos drag run down Shepherds Bush Road in May.}
 

icowden

Senior Member
Location
Surrey
Possibly to try and get Journalists to go away! It should probably read "After phoning the Ambulance 6 times for a statement, the Ambulance Service spokesman wearily said..."
 

slowmotion

Quite dreadful
Location
lost somewhere
Possibly to try and get Journalists to go away! It should probably read "After phoning the Ambulance 6 times for a statement, the Ambulance Service spokesman wearily said..."
I'd question why The Ambulance Service requires a press spokesman at all. What next? An Undertakers' Spokesman to keep the Press happy when the patient dies?
 
[QUOTE="slowmotion, post: 5743248, member: 8064" Why should they, apart from self-advertisement and an indirect plea for further funding.
[/QUOTE].

That is your answer.

The ambulance and fire service both like to let the public know they are getting something for their money.

Thus when the firefighters, for example, strike for more money, the public has already been drip fed the message of what a tremendous year-round job they do.
 

slowmotion

Quite dreadful
Location
lost somewhere
Presumably to prevent the paramedics being stopped and questioned. Allowing them to carry on with their job.
That's a good point.
 

icowden

Senior Member
Location
Surrey
All Trusts and Ambulance Services have someone to deal with the media. It ensures that the clinicians can get on with their work without being harangued and that the message being given out by the organisation meets with Information Governance, Ethics, Privacy etc etc.
 

slowmotion

Quite dreadful
Location
lost somewhere
All Trusts and Ambulance Services have someone to deal with the media. It ensures that the clinicians can get on with their work without being harangued and that the message being given out by the organisation meets with Information Governance, Ethics, Privacy etc etc.
I don't understand how somebody blabbing at a press conference about a patient's condition has anything to do with "Ethics" or "Privacy".

Quite what "Governance" is, God knows.
 

slowmotion

Quite dreadful
Location
lost somewhere
[QUOTE="slowmotion, post: 5743248, member: 8064" Why should they, apart from self-advertisement and an indirect plea for further funding.
.

That is your answer.

The ambulance and fire service both like to let the public know they are getting something for their money.

Thus when the firefighters, for example, strike for more money, the public has already been drip fed the message of what a tremendous year-round job they do.[/QUOTE]
Here's an old article from The Spectator.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2008/07/our-lazy-firemen-must-make-a-radical-change/
 
.

That is your answer.

The ambulance and fire service both like to let the public know they are getting something for their money.

Thus when the firefighters, for example, strike for more money, the public has already been drip fed the message of what a tremendous year-round job they do.
Here's an old article from The Spectator.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2008/07/our-lazy-firemen-must-make-a-radical-change/[/QUOTE]

The Fire Brigades Union is famously militant in a 1970s 'Red Robbo' demarcation kind of way.

Part of the problem is we no longer have fires like we used to, the widespread adoption of fire retardant materials and smoke alarms means a house fire is now a rarity.

Fire prevention strides have also been made in industry making large factory fires largely a thing of the past.

Population shifts have also left fire stations in the wrong places.

Clearly, when something big does kick off, resources need to be available to handle it.

It's a matter of how much resource you are willing to have being paid to stand by for months and months, waiting for the occasion when it's needed.

As a simple anecdote, my brother used to regularly play snooker at a fire station in Birmingham - they had a full size table in the crew room.

On many shifts there were no call outs, and it was common for my brother's mate to do a full shift composed of nothing other than going for his highest break.

Quite a few of the firemen had a second job, relying on getting plenty of kip during their fire service night shift.

Being paid to sleep was not something the union wanted to give up lightly.
 
Top Bottom