Rugd1022 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Hi Bob - these days some of us have to be very careful what we say on public forums and, (for instance) my contract of emplyment states that I mustn't have any dealings with press or media without the company's say so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Thanks Nidge, that's what GNER had in their contract of employment. On top of that it just wasn't worth it really! (after an attempt at being dumped on by a preservation society and a BBC film crew turning up I was never very welcoming of those looking for "railway spokesman" comments). Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
emac Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Isn't "bothy" Scottish for "shed"? Spot on Edwiin_m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Scottish Modeller Posted July 11, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 11, 2012 Hi all, We could end up with terraced bothies! After all - theres enough body sections plus 2 cabs.... Spot on Edwiin_m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 The Mountain Bothies Association could take it over. Local news today reports that the trucks have been removed but the loco would remain where it is for the time being. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 11, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 11, 2012 Thanks Nidge, that's what GNER had in their contract of employment. On top of that it just wasn't worth it really! (after an attempt at being dumped on by a preservation society and a BBC film crew turning up I was never very welcoming of those looking for "railway spokesman" comments). Thanks. I know the feeling Bob - many years ago I did a telephone interview with a local newspaper and they then proceeded to seriously misquote me, which was not a nice experience. My next contact with the press was taking a major press conference after an incident involving a number of passenger fatalities and one becomes very circumspect in those circumstances. Years later on a 'media training course' there was some very good advice which started with 'don't put up a spokesman if you don't want to say anything about the subject' and was followed by several hours of training in techniques of how not to answer the question. And in reality if you do know anything about an incident, or whatever, the best advice is yours from your previous post - steer well clear of passing comments in a public forum. I think the situation is that those who really know what happened or is going to happen are the last persons likely to say anything on the internet (until long after the event and only when things are in the public domain). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 And in reality if you do know anything about an incident, or whatever, the best advice is yours from your previous post - steer well clear of passing comments in a public forum.  I think the situation is that those who really know what happened or is going to happen are the last persons likely to say anything on the internet (until long after the event and only when things are in the public domain). and so it is in the vacuum that is left that the uninformed and ill-informed public have nothing left but to speculate. The news is now and real-time, if the public does not have access to the facts, then they cannot be blamed for wanting to fill the information void. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2012 and so it is in the vacuum that is left that the uninformed and ill-informed public have nothing left but to speculate. The news is now and real-time, if the public does not have access to the facts, then they cannot be blamed for wanting to fill the information void. The other side of that coin being of course just how many of 'the public' will understand the facts, especially once mangled by the even dumber media? Many years ago we used to talk about train delays due to 'track circuit failures' but that was changed to 'signalling equipment problems (or faults)' because passengers etc kept complaining that the information was meaningless because they didn't know what a track circuit was. But then because of concerns following various well headlined incidents we were no longer able to talk about 'signalling equipment problems' because passengers etc could only associate the term with fatal collisions. So it became 'lineside equipment problems' which - hopefully - sent the message that it was nothing to do with anything concerned with a train. So we nowadays have a perfectly safe right side track circuit failure described to passengers as 'a lineside equipment problem' - which it might, or might not, be. If we come back to this derailment in Scotland there is one simple question - how many folk contributing to this thread actually know how to rerail anything in 1:1 scale let alone something which has gone down a bank? Possibly quite a few who have looked at the subject over theyears. How many have actually done it? Not many on here, and how many of us have done it on a site like that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 The other side of that coin being of course just how many of 'the public' will understand the facts In all likelihood very few, but on preselected social medium like this I would hope the percentage is higher than the average "Sun" or "Daily Mail" reader. The lack of facts, still does nothing but encourage speculation. The presentation of those facts in a timely and in a manner understandable by the majority is important as a pure industry specific or jargon filled statement does nothing to inform. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2012 The public have no need to speculate about this event, there were no injuries and other than some disruption there is no effect on them. There is no divine right to information, we rarely even hear about road traffic accidents never mind the cause of them but accept this without a murmur, when did you last see a report published regarding a death on the highway ? At least incidents on the railway are investigated and the results published (too slowly but it happens nevertheless) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 The public have no need to speculate about this event, there were no injuries and other than some disruption there is no effect on them. There is no divine right to information, we rarely even hear about road traffic accidents never mind the cause of them but accept this without a murmur, when did you last see a report published regarding a death on the highway ? At least incidents on the railway are investigated and the results published (too slowly but it happens nevertheless) But the public does speculate on road traffic accidents when they are reported and especially if they are local and particularly if fatal. Also, I think you will find that any road accident involving the police and especially involving a fatality is thoroughly investigated and reported in public at an inquest. I agree there is no right to information, however once an event has been reported there is the right to the truth? Though the truth is not always what is expected and sometimes even facts can be in dispute, at least they form the basis for sensible discussion. As for this incident in particular, although it directly affected only a relative few of the public, once made into a news item reaching a wider audience it is then a subject of wider interest. Like any item of news, it is only public news if it is broadcast to the public. Perhaps in such cases you would be suggesting that the "news" should be restricted to only those who "need" to know? A thin edge of censorship as much as suggesting that the public have no right to discuss or speculate on anything before the facts are released (if they ever are). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2012 As for this incident in particular, although it directly affected only a relative few of the public, once made into a news item reaching a wider audience it is then a subject of wider interest. Like any item of news, it is only public news if it is broadcast to the public. Perhaps in such cases you would be suggesting that the "news" should be restricted to only those who "need" to know? A thin edge of censorship as much as suggesting that the public have no right to discuss or speculate on anything before the facts are released (if they ever are). We were talking about the right to <extra> information rather than the reporting of the news, not the same thing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 We were talking about the right to <extra> information rather than the reporting of the news, not the same thing. I thought we were talking about how an item of news reaches the public domain and how the public are then left to naturally speculate on that news in the absence of, or more importantly withholding of, the facts. In my mind any news should contain full disclosure of the facts and the public does have a right to those facts. At least as and when those facts become available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Really the "public" have little more right to info on this particular matter than they do regarding an accident in an office or other workplace....... I would agree completely if only this had not been made a public news item in the first place. An accident in an office causing disruption to the working of that office alone probably would never have been placed in the public domain as news. It's keeping secret and inconsequential nature would possibly have not been of interest to anyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I thought we were talking about how an item of news reaches the public domain and how the public are then left to naturally speculate on that news in the absence of, or more importantly withholding of, the facts. In my mind any news should contain full disclosure of the facts and the public does have a right to those facts. At least as and when those facts become available. In this case though, the relevant facts are: * There was a landslide. * The landslide derailed a freight train. * Line is (was) definately blocked and services will not run until they can clear the line. * Crew and everyone else is okay. And all of that was already in the news reported to the general public. The bits that all the consternation have been over isn't stuff liable to be of interest to the general public, and you can't really put it under 'facts which have become available' either as i'm sure there *still* are many decisions not yet taken by the folk involved - things like speculation on whether the loco has been officially written off or not aren't of general public interest (and to be honest, are largely irrelevant to the enthusiast community too, the phrase 'written off' only means the insurance company pays out the book value, and doesn't mean it'll never run again!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I would agree completely if only this had not been made a public news item in the first place. An accident in an office causing disruption to the working of that office alone probably would never have been placed in the public domain as news. It's keeping secret and inconsequential nature would possibly have not been of interest to anyone. At what point Kenton does it become the publics right to full disclosure? Irrespective of the cause or outcome it's always been the railways policy to release as much information as is possible. Little comment can be made at an early stage as despite what so called "informed sources" might say, they are generally no different from members of the public. Even if they are directly involved or associated with an event they will not be in full possession of all the facts required to make "full disclosure" and certainly as has been proved in the past many of those facts don't come to light until viewed as a whole. Any comments made in these circumstances, particularly to the media, on bulletion boards, forums or whatever - just because speculation is out there would frankly be foolish and likely to be ill informed. As to the technical aspects of recovery of the locomotive is that anyones business but the owner and Network Rail? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 It isn't anyones else's business. However as railway enthusiasts we are natuarally interested in the process as part of the wider interest in the way the railway works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 At what point Kenton does it become the public's right to full disclosure? At the point at which the facts are known. It is an unfortunate consequence of 24/7 global news reporting that the time taken between reporting an event to the time of reporting the facts is so long. Also with the short-termism of "news" by the time the facts are available they have both lost their immediacy and get reported in coded small print on obscure page xx instead of in the same bold type of the original announcement. As to the technical aspects of recovery of the locomotive is that anyones business but the owner and Network Rail? Evidently some members of the public find it interesting. It is the fact that we (public) - probably the majority of us on RMWeb - are repeatedly being told not to speculate on matters such as this by those who potentially are, or claim to be, "in the know" on such matters. I accept that they may not be in a position to add the facts and may not even be allowed to but then they surely should not contribute? I may be unusual in believing that speculative enquiry is healthy in that we can learn from it, and that any curtailing of it is either suspicious or simply censorship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2012 As The Jam say "Read all about it" http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/current_investigations_register/120628_tulloch.cfm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 The problem is Kenton, the facts are not known at an early stage and even in BR days (for an internal enquiry) could still take days to gather the initial required information and beyond that used for immediate corrective actions if they were needed as such, no evidence (and bear in mind it could be and was at times used in criminal cases) could be revealed, not least in respect of any consequent HMRI led investigation or Public Inquiry. Whether 24/7 news or forum gossip demands it or not has little to do with it, and neither does the severity of the incident. Only the paranoid would suggest that it's a method of public censorship or suspicious in any way. Nothing can be learned by jumping off half cocked! As Mike has clearly said, it doesn't matter what "facts" are given to the meeja, many will have decided already - or will invite Christian Woolmar to pronounce forth. As to those allegedly "in the know" well they should know better or perhaps they don't do either..... But that's me being suspicious. You're mileage may vary Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted July 12, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 12, 2012 As for this incident in particular, although it directly affected only a relative few of the public, I think this particular incident has affected more of RMWeb than the "general" public....... Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 It seems to me that the only argument here is whether or not the locomotive will be recovered in one piece or cut up on site - in the big scheme of the accident it is not something that is of public interest - we know the base facts behind the incident, we know the result and we know no-one died. This was all reported by the press and then as there was nothing else that would concern the public after the line re-opened the press stopped reporting. What we seem to have now is a small group on 'enthusiasts' debating what is in their definition of public interest and expecting private companies or employees thereof to spill the beans on what is happening as not doing so is a violation of their rights to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John M Upton Posted July 18, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 18, 2012 New issue of Rail Express which has just started dropping through the letterboxes of subscribers like me states that it 'has' been written off by the insurance company. Can't help thinking this is the same speculative murmuring of the armchair experts that has been repeated enough to be treated as "fact" reheated and served in print. Although Rail Express is usually pretty reliable unlike Rail mag on the other hand which I would not believe if it told me my hair was on fire without a second opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 The loco WILL be recovered simply because it cant stay where it is, how many bits it is recovered in is debatable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
emac Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 Well at the moment the loco remains where it is well tapped up and now a tourist attraction from the passing trains latest photo at http://www.scot-rail...o/scaled/12233/ Try the link it may work for you if not you will have to log into the scot-rail site to see this photo as well as many other scottish railway photographs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.