What's Your Opinion on this Headline?

p1 ama on 08/10/2018 - 01:33
Last edited 08/10/2018 - 08:52 by 1 other user

I was reading the news today and came across this Headline:

"Tributes flow for Cheltenham crash victim Paige Dent"

Made me think that she was an innocent victim killed in a road accident. However, after reading more about this, she wasn't a victim at all.

She drove down a major Melbourne road at double the speed limit, whilst intoxicated with alcohol and drugs and wrapped herself around a pole. In all regards, I'm terribly thankful that nobody else got hurt.

I think it's about time that we stop referring to these sorts of cases as "traffic accidents". Sure, you may accidentally have a crash, but nobody accidentally gets in a car whilst that incapable to drive and proceeds to drive that recklessly. That is a deliberate and calculated decision.

I'm not a saint when driving, I speed, I get fined, I do silly things sometimes, so this isn't a "holier than thou" rant. I just think that so many people make bad decisions because we don't see this for what it is, a dangerous act that is no different to firing a gun madly and randomly.

My heart goes out to her and her family. Nobody deserves to die, but this isn't an accident.

Automotive

Comments

  • Sage on 08/10/2018 - 02:24
    +3

    It seems most news articles are either exaggerated, made up, or created with a bias motive.
    I'm not surprised they spun this into a tragedy. It's like whenever there's a shooting they count the perpetrator in the death toll to make it seem worse.

    • p1 ama on 08/10/2018 - 02:57

      Yeah, my main issue with it all is that this is spun as an accident happening to an otherwise good person.

      • Randxyz123 on 08/10/2018 - 10:41
        +2

        In my view, unless it’s confirmed by an autotopsy police shouldn’t go around saying “drugs and alcohol” were involved.

        Speed is probably a obvious factor as shown by the debris.

        People screw up and unless this person had a history of doing this, then the tributes and article is genuine imo.

        • spiff on 08/10/2018 - 12:34

          Regardless of whether drugs and alcohol were involved, or whether she had a history of speeding, it was still a deliberate decision to speed in those moments that allowed that kind of crash to happen. She only has herself to blame (well not anymore) and the media shouldn't spin this to absolve her from responsibility, through headline or content.

          • GG57 on 08/10/2018 - 13:37
            +1

            @spiff: I don't think this reporting has been spun (apart from using the term 'victim'). There are plenty of facts in the report, and I couldn't identify any hyperbole.

            And the grief of families and friends is real; I imagine (in this case) it would be similar to that of a relative / friend that suicides.

            • p1 ama on 08/10/2018 - 20:44
              +1

              @GG57:

              I don't think this reporting has been spun (apart from using the term 'victim').

              I think framing is everything. I've spent a lot of time looking at risky behaviours on roads and several of my colleagues specialise in the area, investigating risk factors for dangerous driving and the effects of traffic policy.

              One of the major reasons why people do things like this on roads is because it's not perceived to be dangerous. Deaths on roads are viewed as "accidents", things that happen to people randomly. It certainly is not an "accident", a lot of the time, deaths on roads are the direct consequence of the driver. This is not "just an accident", this is not "just a lovely, sweet, kind person who has passed away", it is a deliberate and dangerous act which could have killed other innocent people.

  • DarkOz on 08/10/2018 - 07:15

    It's simply another case of fake news. Obviously the "victim" has relatives and friends paying tributes with some of the kind-hearted public chiming in not knowing the truth.

  • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 08:47

    It is a social convention that we try not to speak ill of the dead, unless they were particularly evil.

    • HighAndDry on 08/10/2018 - 09:48
      +1

      Considering she could've easily killed someone else other than herself, and other people in her situation very often have… how low is this bar?

      • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 11:23

        I admit it is in bad taste asking for donations, but the issue is probably better addressed with a PSA than by tearing apart a dead girls actions whilst their family is grieving.

        • HighAndDry on 08/10/2018 - 11:23
          +3

          There's no "tearing apart" anyone. It's a news article, not an obit. I'd want it to be as factually accurate as possible. That's all.

          • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 11:27
            +1

            @HighAndDry: News is a business, its in the business of selling news. Sensationalism is par for the course these days.

            • HighAndDry on 08/10/2018 - 11:28

              @[Deactivated]: Unfortunately too true. Can't see a solution for it either - it's what 'the people' want, news has to cater to it, or they'll go to someone who does.

            • pegaxs on 08/10/2018 - 11:36
              +1

              @[Deactivated]:

              its in the business of selling news ads.

              FTFY…

        • p1 ama on 08/10/2018 - 20:48
          +1

          It's because, by and large, society still views reckless behaviour on roads as "accidents".

          Yes, if you drive normally, don't be reckless and are otherwise safe, you can still get into a crash. This is an accident - something beyond your control.

          If you drive like this driver did. That is not an accident. That is reckless and dangerous behaviour and should be termed as such. Imagine any other example, e.g. shooting. You can be a responsible gun owner and take care and still be involved in an accident. On the other hand, you can stand in the middle of the street and start shooting randomly everywhere. That's like what this driver did here. If you did that, nobody would say it was an accident that someone got hit.

  • altomic on 08/10/2018 - 09:19
    +4

    (1) newspaper prints clickbait.
    (2) public criticize the newspaper for clickbait.
    (3) ???????
    (4) profit

    Any publicity is good publicity.
    Credible journalism is dead.

  • Masterpupil on 08/10/2018 - 09:24
    +3

    You're right. I saw this headline, did not read the article but assumed by the wording of it was the death of someone 'innocent'. It would seem that is incorrect, and the only good thing is that no one else was killed by the deceased's reckless conduct.

    The debris is unbelievable.

  • GG57 on 08/10/2018 - 09:53

    The use of the term 'victim' is inaccurate in this case, if (as reported) that "…speed, drugs and alcohol appear to have been factors…".

    Apart from that, it is accurate that this incident has almost certainly had a terrible impact on the deceased's family and friends, and that they are mourning and paying tribute.

    Being generous, perhaps the article is framed to further increase awareness in the larger community (or act as a reminder) about the risks and impacts of speeding, drugs and alcohol. Because obviously the message is not getting through to everyone.

  • shaybisc on 08/10/2018 - 09:56
    +6

    Crazy drunk kills herself in car crash.

    • Master Bates on 08/10/2018 - 13:26

      This would probably get more clicks than the other headline!

  • Cheeper on 08/10/2018 - 10:26

    Journalism job #1 these days… Create Sensationalism.
    It seems like everytime you read a news article you want to research more to confirm the facts as they are usually lacking in most articles.
    There are road fatalities every day and most often they are caused by that person not taking due care for their own well being and for the well being of other road users. Many make comments about how sorry they are for the life lost but in the case of just the recless driver being the only victim I thank god there is one less idiot on the road.
    Motorcycle riders are the classic case… they are always pointing the finger at other road users but in most accidents they are the cause of their own desmise.

    • pegaxs on 08/10/2018 - 10:47

      You had me up till your rant about motorcycle riders. You obviously don't own one or have not spent time riding on the road.

      While a percentage of motorcycle accidents are a result of the rider being a dill or not wearing the correct protective equipment, your comment just goes to show how ignorant you are to dismiss all riders with your typical cager opinion.

      As a motorcycle rider, I have to ride to save my life. It very well depends on it. Car drivers, for the most part, are oblivious to motorcycle riders. They sit in their air conditioned, sound proof safety cell while they update their social media bullshit, like anyone gives a rats ring bit. Car drivers don't perceive motorcycles as a risk and treat them accordingly.

      It's through the typical car driver ignorance and arrogance outlined in your above post that does nothing to help motorcycle riders stay alive on the road. We pay our road taxes as well, usually on multiple vehicles.

      And I can assure you, there are less arsehole riders out there than there is ignorant and arrogant car drivers.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 11:51

        That's not a statistically well reasoned argument. There are 19 million registered vehicles on the roads and only 800,000 are motorbikes. Pound for pound, motorcycles punch above their weight in douchebaggery.

        • pegaxs on 08/10/2018 - 11:58

          You’re right, the amount of motorcycle riders I see using their phones while ridING is astonishingly well above car drivers…

          • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 12:04
            -1

            @pegaxs: They are probably too busy revving their engines needlessly and lane filtering onto pedestrian crossings. Maybe it's the combination of construction tradies and motorbikes, but they are the biggest geese on the roads around my area.

            • pegaxs on 08/10/2018 - 12:12

              @[Deactivated]: Nice. Double down on the stereotypes… That really seals your argument… 😁

      • spiff on 08/10/2018 - 12:37

        You're trying to victimise yourself but it sounds like all your problems would go away if you just drove a car :D

        • pegaxs on 08/10/2018 - 13:20
          +2

          I bypassed cars and went on to fix my problem by driving trucks. Car drivers tend to notice them. :D

        • poboy on 08/10/2018 - 15:04
          +1

          After riding a motorbike for a short period you forget how easy it is to commute.

          The time will come when someone offers to give you a lift in their car. You get in. Then you experience traffic. You shake your head at the insanity of people wanting to commute in cars every day.

          but anyway… to your point…

          My gut feeling is that 80% of motorcycle riders that are killed, contribute to their own deaths as they do not account for dangers. In minor car/motorcyle 'walk away' crashes - I'd apportion the blame 50/50.

          It's the close calls that aren't counted as statistics because there is no damage. Motorcyclists can spot a moron driver from some distance - thereby avoiding trouble and an accident. If there is a collision - see above paragraph.

      • p1 ama on 08/10/2018 - 20:54
        -1

        There are bad drivers, there are bad riders.

        I would generally say that the average incompetence of a car driver is higher, however, the average douchebaggery of a rider is higher.

        Most of the time, when a car annoys me, it's because the driver is incompetent and incapable of driving properly (e.g. they fail to merge even though I give them a clear gap and cause me to come to a complete stop). Most of the time, when a motorbike annoys me, it's because they cut in between lanes out of nowhere, causing me to hit the brakes, and zip off at 30 km/h over the speed limit. Other times, it's because they're revving their Harley's at the lights.

        That said, overall, I do agree with you that riders are better riders than drivers are drivers. A lot of car drivers would just be dead if they commuted by motorbike. None of this applies to all these riders delivering UberEats though, they are downright horrible and just plain idiots sometimes.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 22:52
        +1

        I support and encourage your choice to ride, i think it is a very ecologically sound and economical form of transport and people should lay the hell off.

  • pegaxs on 08/10/2018 - 10:34
    +1

    If they put the truth in the heading of the article, you would not have read it or clicked on the link.

    It's not about news anymore, it's about serving you ads. It's about getting your attention and clicking through their site. The more pages you click on, the more ads they can serve you.

    My only curiosity would be, what would the headlines have been if A: the gender was changed to male. Or B: if she was a woman, under the same circumstances as this article, but ended up killing another innocent road user…

  • hawkeye on 08/10/2018 - 12:52

    It's all pretty funny until someone loses an eye.
    22 young n dumb blue bmw got to be related to each other.
    https://7plus.com.au/highway-patrol?episode-id=HWYP-002

  • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2018 - 15:46
    -1

    Still better than the soon to be norm - You can't believe what insert subject/event did or something you never knew could be affecting/not affecting you and you need to know.

  • Euphemistic on 08/10/2018 - 17:44
    +1

    And have you noticed how the language seems to point to the car or truck rather than the driver. It’s a subtle distinction that de-personalized incidents as well.

  • Masterpupil on 08/10/2018 - 22:10

    Interestingly there was a later article in The Age which provided far more context. Apparently this woman had very serious psychiatric problems and effectively absconded from psychiatric care. I cannot imagine why the original article didn't mention that if they were trying to portray the deceased as a victim of some sort.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join