Mud-club

Chat & Social => The Bar - General Chat => Topic started by: thermidorthelobster on September 23, 2006, 10:08:06

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: thermidorthelobster on September 23, 2006, 10:08:06

I've resisted joining in with these paranoia topics before, but:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/wear/5372972.stm

"Jeep Killer"???

So if it had been a Peugeot, would it have been the "Peugeot Killer" story?

It's subtle, but unrelenting, and it's started to get my goat a little.

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: dreadnought110 on September 23, 2006, 10:31:28

:? Its just like with trucks you hear of an accident and they say the truck was driving like whatever... and you find it's a transit pick-up they just can't help but sensationalise the new's it does your head in....  :x  Ok rant over i better get back to work (hang on i am being paid overtime while i type this Wahay!!! :D )

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: bezzabsa on September 23, 2006, 10:40:29

because it sells papers!
do they know if it was a stolen vehicle? or was it the owner driving it?
at least they called a jeep a jeep... usually any 4x4 is a land rover!!!

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: Henry Webster on September 23, 2006, 13:01:01

Possibly a little bit of over sensitivity here - I agree there is a general bias against 4x4's, but in this particular example that is accurate reporting.

H

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: hobbit on September 23, 2006, 13:48:27

Accurate in the case of vehicle type, but not the normal driver, this was stolen was it not?

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: thermidorthelobster on September 23, 2006, 16:29:33

My problem with it is that the headline implies that the fact that the vehicle was a Jeep is intrinsic to the story, whereas as far as I can see it is wholly coincidental.

Anybody glancing at the headline on the index pages (as millions will) will be inclined to think the story is about somebody who has been killed because they've been hit by a Jeep.  This is true as a statement of fact, but misleading as the Jeep is not relevant to the death.

So next time there is an anti-4x4 discussion in the local pub, people will be thinking "oh yes, there was that thing I saw on the BBC website about the person being killed by a Jeep".

Title: Why are the media so anti 4x4?
Post by: smog on September 24, 2006, 01:40:01

My problem is that all the ANTI 4x4 sites have hit counters or have hits recorded on their servers and they use these figures against us simply by saying things like “1 billion people hit our site last year so they support us”, but we all merrily click away at links and it simply adds fuel to the fire.

We are simply a soft target, the day other countries do as much as we do to try to improve the environment and lessen pollution is the day I will actually care.

As for killing people with 4x4’s obviously it’s headline grabbing because it simply jumps on the band wagon as it were, all cars and drivers are potential killers when mixed but then so are axes and people or knives or even guns and people or even lets go all out and simply state that all things can and are dangerous no more so than anything else in the right or wrong hands depending on point of view of course.

People misunderstand the modern 4x4 and misquote too much stuff but people all to often follow like sheep and believe what they are told.

Ok this is turning into me ranting and rambling random stuff so I am going to simply stop.