Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Media Justice?

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by [FLUX], Mar 25, 2008.

  1. Just something else to make the blood boil.

    Original Thread

    Said motorcyclist opens up the newspaper today to find a report on the accident in which he was involved in, which basically consisted of the following:

    Is it any wonder why some people on here are ready to throw riders to the wolves when cars can run down riders head on without any real repercussions, and the media paints the incidents out to be all the motorcyclist's fault?
  2. Journo's leave a bit to be desired at times: an early report on my accident stated that I "had succumbed to my injuries". :shock: Not bad hey...
    I really hate emotive reporting :evil:
  3. Very shoddy work on the journalists part.

    But it is a NewsCorp rag so not that suprising really.
  4. it makes me sick,the amount of vomit the media spew out on a regular basis.be it a delicately twisted slant on a story,simply failing to tell the whole story or just maiking up complete bullsh!t to passify and encourage the pathetic masses of society to have a particular perspective on a subject.but then us smart ones all know this.we cop it everyday.i could seriously go on an insane rant fest but i will refrain.
    and by the way,the young bloke who nearly killed mountaineer needs his fckn ar$e kicked.
  5. Which is precisely why there is a ban on 'rider down' threads on Netrider....
  6. Flux you can complain about shoddy / inaccurate Journalism.

    (i) Ask the paper to publish a retraction / correction
    (ii) If they do not, lodge a formal complaint with the appropriate body. (I think it's the press council). The paper will then be forced to publish an "oops" article.

    Just my 2c
  7. In addition send multiple letters to teh editor ofthat and multiple competeting news papers. be extremely carefull in your wording as they may/will edit the letter for publishing (If it gets published at all)
  8. Are these journos too lazy to properly investigate the facts? .. or are they just plain fcuking STUPID ?? :roll: :roll:
    Glad to hear he made it through what could have been .. ( let's not go there :eek:hno: )
    How's the bike? or shouldn't I ask :shock:
  9. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    Don't you just love Netrider because:

    1) Everything car drivers and "the media" do is wrong

    2) Everything motorcyclists do is right.


    I wouldn't worry, FLUX, the motorcyclist enjoyed the experience. He didn't think it was bad at all. Read the bits I haven't highlighted from his own story.

    Whose fault is it if no one thinks that the car driver committed a serious, almost fatal blunder?

    If you are the victim in an accident, any accident, scream, yell, cry, shake, abuse the other person, do anything except threaten or attack them physically. NEVER say, "It's OK, I'm not hurt, all's wells that ends well" and other rubbish.

    Why do insurance companies instruct their clients not to make comments or admit liability when they are involved in an accident?

    You will see it on the football field. You will see it in court. Correctly done it is sometimes, unfortunately, the only way that some semblance of justice will be done. Play to the audience, whether it is the media, the police, the other party, whoever.

    The other guilty parties in this instance are the motorists who didn't make a gap for the errant driver to return to his lane. It's hard to catch up with them, though.


    Trevor G

    PS There is no point in the victim acting peacably at the scene and then making a big fuss in a forum, except to show what a goose he really is/was in acting that way at the time, and then expecting sympathy afterwards.
  10. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    So you have an injured party there, they screwed up and almost cost you your life. How does screaming and yelling help at that point in time? How much humanity does that display? It makes sense and shows great strength of character to help them through that time. (I’ll be honest I am not sure I could do it) But it doesn’t change the fact that they have F#$ked up right royally and once healthy should be held to account for there actions. Victim impact statements I think are an absolute abomination within the legal system. The legal system should be about the Intent of the perpetrator not the effect on the victim. If you are talking about the effect on the victim then you are talking about revenge, if you are talking about the intent of the perpetrator then you are talking about justice.
    Showing compassion at the time of the incident should not impact the measuring of justice.
  11. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    Your considerate thoughts and intentions are best left for family or personal situations where such grace is often not extended.

    With strangers in an emergency as portrayed by Mountaineer, never!

    All the best

  12. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    The guy was hit head on by an oncoming car in his own lane. In near-death accidents like that the body/brain goes into shock and doesn't react normally. Concern for the self tends to be quite low.

    Take, for example, the guy who was badly burned in the Bali bombings. He kept refusing treatment saying that others needed more help than him. He wasn't being a hero, he was in shock.

    Trevor G, I find your comments facile to the point of ludicrosity and they appear to only serve to be inflammatory for the sake of being so by calling the rider a goose for being hit by an oncoming car that was aimed at him. I think that you've done a pretty good job here of letting everyone know exactly how stubborn you are with respect to holding onto an argumentative point far beyond the stretches of reasonable debate.
  13. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    And this attitude is the bassis of why I am left with the somewhat cynical view that
    Humanity Sucks!
  14. Trevor G aside from the fact that I disagree with pretty much most of your post, my advice was to the OP on how to correct false / incorrect / misleading newspaper reporting. Frankly the rest is "noise".
  15. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    Aaah, if only I had actually said that, you would be looking good now.

    Settle down and learn how to respond in the day of trouble.

    We can't do anything now for the guy who didn't handle it correctly. It wasn't his fault he got hit. It's what he did afterwards that was foolish in the extreme. Noble, but very foolish.

    We can train motorcyclists to look after their interests (my intentions) when the unexpected and unfortunate happens.

    If you want some semblance of justice, especially since the odds often seem stacked against motorcyclists, you DON'T go around making excuses for the guilty party. Especially at the scene.


    Trevor G
  16. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    Who sais he didn't handle it correctly?
    He handled it in a manner that was humain. he was thinking of people not revenge.
    Why blame him for showing compasion, instead of blaming the court process for not being truly impartial.
    Compasion bellongs between people but courts should be accurate and incompasionate.
    You are blaming the wrong person.
  17. mmmff...I don't seen anything foolish in Nobility...

    ...but I get where you are coming from with respect to neglecting to take care of our own needs, which will often be ignored by most selfish others.
  18. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    So you're busting out the insurance company line of not admitting to anything because blame should not be apportioned at the scene by those involved, but it's ok to accuse the other person to correct imbalance even though... "blame should not be apportioned at the scene by those involved" ?
  19. Re: Media Justice? No - accident victim foolishness

    Trevor G, I think the point of the post has been slightly missed. I don't see where the OP makes this an insurance issue. All I see is a media perception issue. The guy was hit head on in his own lane. Clearly the car was in the wrong but the media have reported in a way that suggests it was the bike's fault. The injustice is that he behaved calmly and rationally in a situation where he was put in grave danger, only to have an outside party (who wasn't there) portray him publicly as reckless. Had the rider been acting like a prick at the scene, the reporter would have been more likely to hold his view that riders are irresponsible wankers.

    I have no issues with getting the other party to admit fault at the scene. It's always helped with the insurance in the past. That said, I'm not a prick about it and I don't see why I shouldn't show compasion for them. In any accident, both parties will be rattled and ranting/shouting and raving about it only inflames tension and makes you look like a childish idiot. :)
  20. :roll:

    Hindsight is always 20/20.

    Only when the situation happens to you do you know how YOU'LL react - whether you'll be angry, or shaken and sympathetic to the other person, or whether you'll be too stunned to do anything but sit there wondering how the hell you just survived.

    Laying into someone and saying "You should have done this this and this" is pointless. Unless you were there and had it happen to you, how can you guarantee you'd act in a particular way?

    Sure - you don't admit liability at the scene for insurance purposes. Don't see anywhere in my policy however that states you can't be civil to another human being who whilst being in the wrong, is probably equally as upset as you.

    If they were cocky, arrogant, and acting like a prick to you after almost killing you, then sure, arc up and give them a serve. There's nothing wrong with compassion for your fellow man.