[Closed] A collision involving a pedestrian and a car

You are obviously trying to make some sort of point here?

my local paper used to always put 'cyclist who collided with car' as the wording.

I started putting comments under every article saying that it implied fault.

Don;'t know if one of their lawyers saw it but they've more circumspect recently.

If it says 'collision' I tend to infer that two vehicles (of some description) are involved. Although if a pedestrian walks into the side of your car, clearly they have collided with it. I'd think they are just struggling for a universally understood description of the incident. 'An incident, involving a pedestrian and a car' could mean anything.

You are obviously trying to make some sort of point here?

Yeah - I'd have thought it quite obvious what.

You are obviously trying to make some sort of point here?

Point being that cyclist collisions are usually referred to with subtle victim-blaming comments like: "The cyclist, who was not wearing a helmet, ..."
whereas pedestrian ones are much more neutral or, if biased, usually assume the driver is at fault.

The other one that annoys me is "The car left the road" as if the car had decided of its own volition that being on the road was a bit boring.
It should read: "as a result of the driver being unable to control their vehicle, probably through driving like a cock, the vehicle left the road"

Here, the car driver is "blamed" for hitting the ped, but the cyclist collision is reported in a non-fault way.

Still bias, but not as bad.

One that I've seen a lot is "a cyclist was in collision with a car". Which doesn't even seem right grammatically, and certainly seems to heap blame on the cyclist. Rather than the neutral "a collision involving a cyclist and a car".

"[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-20675824 ]A bungalow[/url] was in collision with a car".

An investigation into the cause of the crash is under way.

This is the important bit

The [b]cyclist[/b], a man from the Evesham area, [b]suffered serious, life threatening injuries[/b] and is being treated at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham.

The [b]driver[/b] of the Volvo, from the Chipping Campden area, [b]was uninjured.[/b]

I thought this one in the Bristol post was quite odd:

[url= http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Pedestrian-dies-crash-involving-lorry/story-17547591-detail/story.html ]A FEMALE pedestrian has died after colliding with a lorry [/url]

I suspect the collision was more the lorry colliding with her than the other way.

Yeah - I'd have thought it quite obvious what.

I'm not sure it is ?

The other one that annoys me is "The car left the road" as if the car had decided of its own volition that being on the road was a bit boring.

@KatsDekker on Twitter often links to these. She calls them #driverless cars.

Interestingly the wording has been changed in the follow up article - it appears she did collide with the car!

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/10100838.Woman_stable_after_Spetchley_Road_collision/