Was the main story on the front page of the printed version today - spotted it as I was browsing the newspaper racks. Yes I know it's not a real newspaper, but is the responsibility of other road users now seen as being so minimal that the headline doesn't even mention the lorry and its driver which is what really killed him?
not getting involved with tabloid reporting, potholes, lorries, drivers in general.
RIP Capt J Allen
I don't think you understand tabloid journalism aracer.
Hero who fought the Taliban is killed by a pothole, sounds far more shocking than saying he was killed by a lorry.
Plus the comment, [i]"The accident follows a national outcry over the state of Britain's roads"[/i] falls nicely into line that the country is in a mess, it's all part of Broken Britain, New Labour have screwed up, time to give Dave a chance, etc, etc.
Just blaming the lorry driver, would have robbed them of a truly shocking story.
Would that political bias also be the reason for this headline, Ernie? 😆
At least they put the bit about being killed by a pothole in speech marks and said it [i]may[/i] have been involved, The Sun piece is fair less equivocal
Would that political bias also be the reason for this headline, Ernie?
No, clearly not in your second link aracer 🙄
You are not really paying attention - are you ?
I [i]said[/i] : "Hero who fought the Taliban is killed by a pothole, sounds far more shocking than saying he was killed by a lorry". Tabloid journalism relies heavily on shocking people. Both the Sun and the Mirror are tabloid papers, so obviously have a simular style of reporting.
I merely said that in the case of the Sun, it had the added advantage of reminding people that, the country is in a mess, it's all part of Broken Britain, New Labour have screwed up, time to give Dave a chance, etc, etc.
However the article in your second link does not suggest that "the accident follows a national outcry over the state of Britain's roads". So they are clearly not trying to squeeze a bit of political mileage out of it.
And why would they ? .... the Mirror is a Labour supporting paper, so they are hardly likely to exploit the situation.
I can't see why that is so difficult for you to understand. Maybe you're just pretending to be stupid, eh ?
And why would they ? .... the Mirror is a Labour supporting paper, so they are hardly likely to exploit the situation.I can't see why that is so difficult for you to understand.
<whoosh>
Because the "national outcry over the state of Britain's roads" is simply a bit of Tory propaganda and no right thinking Labour supporter would dream of suggesting the roads were in anything but a perfect state. Of course the Sun being a Tory "newspaper" is bound to spell out that it's all the fault of the Labour government if that is the point they're trying to make (the Sun doesn't do subtle does it?) just as it does in that article. Oh...
You are so right Ernie about how some will make a political point out of anything.
You've completely lost the plot mate.
The reference to pothole was [i]not[/i] to attack the government - it was to shock the readers.
However, in the case of the Sun, it had the added advantage that they could also include a sentence which could be seen as a little dig at the government. The Mirror didn't bother with that.
Of course had we had a different situation, and instead of Labour being in power the Tory were, then I hazard to guess that the Mirror might have made an issue of the state Britain's roads, whilst the Sun might well have kept schtum.
THAT'S HOW TABLOID JOURNALISM WORKS !..........they shock their readers and milk stories for maximum political gain.
FFS, you ask a question which I try to answer for you, and I end up having a completely pointless argument with you........I wish I'd never bothered 😐
you ask a question which I try to answer for you
If only you had just done that, you might have spared yourself the agony.
Aracer - ernie answered it perfectly clearly.
The whoosh was as the point went flying past your head.
The Highway Code makes it clear (rule 132?- sorry dont have my copy handy) that overtaking/following traffic should be aware that cyclists may have to deviate from their line because of obstacles and road surface defects.
The lorry driver, looks,at the moment, like he ignored that, and gave insufficient room, thus leading to the fatality.
However, lets not let that get in the way of the headlines that ernie mentions...
...And not to mention that 'cyclists shouldn't, of course, be on a busy road'... 🙄
Compare & contrast the Mirror & Sun to the [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/7536714/Afghanistan-veteran-killed-swerving-round-pothole-on-British-road.html ]Telegraph[/url] & work out the differences between broadsheet & tabloid journalism.
Aracer why are you being such a tool? Are you not aware of the deal made between the Murdochs and the Tories?