Good news from the BBC
Discussion
And let me guess who the RAC interviewed for such facts - a bunch of candy-floss haired coffin dodgers and mums on a school run.
78% supporting the use of speed cameras - pah! OK, I can see the logic of having them at potential accident sites (outside schools, residential areas etc.) but we all know that most of them are there purely for revenue generation.
Sod it, I'm off to live in France!
I went to the RAC site to check on this & it's an extract from the RAC Motoring Report 2002. All you can get from the site is abstracts from the report...
The full report can be purchased from them for... are you ready for this.... £495 !!
So I'm going to speak to someone at the ABD to see if they have a copy.
Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 23 January 10:22
The full report can be purchased from them for... are you ready for this.... £495 !!
So I'm going to speak to someone at the ABD to see if they have a copy.
Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 23 January 10:22
quote:
My, what a perceptive survey:
quote:
The RAC also said most drivers now accept traffic jams as a way of life, with many leaving extra time for delays during their journeys.
Who'd have thought it?
You'd be amazed at how many people don't leave a bit of extra time to get to the Airport and end up late..
Imagine what would happen if you a) left home without taking traffic jams into account, b) didn't have any money on you for the Heathrow Entry Tax and c) forgot your passport.
By the time you'd sorted that lot out, calmed down and found your check in desk you'd have missed the flight by about 3 days !!
By the time you'd sorted that lot out, calmed down and found your check in desk you'd have missed the flight by about 3 days !!
I downloaded the press pack on this report from RAC and the Speeding report (called SPEED CONSUMER FINAL.DOC) contained therein has some 'interesting facts'
Their survey showed the following:
Equally, if 78% think cameras are good, how do they reconcile this against the 60% who think they cause sudden and dangerous braking?
Strikes me that these stats were conjoured up by asking these questions to different groups - hence invalidating the results.
Another interesting one:
Their survey showed the following:
quote:So how come 78% think cameras are a good idea if 48% think that they are revenue generators for the govt. ??
· 78% of drivers consider speed cameras a good way of deterring people from speeding and they do not consider speed cameras as infringement of their personal liberty
· 60% agree that speed cameras cause people to slow down dangerously quickly
· 57% of motorists want cameras painted yellow or orange
· 48% suggest that cameras are just a way of raising revenue for the police/ government
Equally, if 78% think cameras are good, how do they reconcile this against the 60% who think they cause sudden and dangerous braking?
Strikes me that these stats were conjoured up by asking these questions to different groups - hence invalidating the results.
Another interesting one:
quote:Speed realy really kills then, doesn't it morons?
·Almost 50% of motorists provided an estimate on the number of deaths on UK roads – the average given was 16,000 per annum. The reality in 2000 was 3,409 deaths that year.
quote:
· 78% of drivers consider speed cameras a good way of deterring people from speeding and they do not consider speed cameras as infringement of their personal liberty
That really annoys me. The BBC have it down as :
quote:They are totally misrepresenting the results of the report. I would consider a speed camera an effective deterrant to speeding, but that doesn't mean I support them.
78% back the use of speed cameras
Slating sent to the BBC (newsonline@bbc.co.uk) thus:
To the BBC: re your article "Drivers 'back ban on mobiles'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1776000/1776784.stm
This story contains a number of gross misrepresentations and amounts to nothing more than the sort of anti-motorist propaganda for which the BBC is becoming very well known.
In the box out, you say that "78% of drivers support cameras"
Well, I have reas the press pack from which you drew this 'fact' and what it actually says is:
"78% of drivers consider speed cameras a good way of deterring people from speeding and they do not consider speed cameras as infringement of their personal liberty"
That is hardly the same as "78% are in favour of cameras" now is it? Where is the journalistic integrity?
Furthermore, adjacent to this statistic in the press pack are the following:
"60% agree that speed cameras cause people to slow down dangerously quickly"
and
"48% suggest that cameras are just a way of raising revenue for the police/ government"
So, how does one reconcile the 78^% apparently in favour with the 48% who believe that cameras are merely a revenue generator?
I'll leave you to ponder this. I have CCed the Association of British Drivers on this email as I believe they'll be most interested in rebuking your slanted reportage.
regards
To the BBC: re your article "Drivers 'back ban on mobiles'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1776000/1776784.stm
This story contains a number of gross misrepresentations and amounts to nothing more than the sort of anti-motorist propaganda for which the BBC is becoming very well known.
In the box out, you say that "78% of drivers support cameras"
Well, I have reas the press pack from which you drew this 'fact' and what it actually says is:
"78% of drivers consider speed cameras a good way of deterring people from speeding and they do not consider speed cameras as infringement of their personal liberty"
That is hardly the same as "78% are in favour of cameras" now is it? Where is the journalistic integrity?
Furthermore, adjacent to this statistic in the press pack are the following:
"60% agree that speed cameras cause people to slow down dangerously quickly"
and
"48% suggest that cameras are just a way of raising revenue for the police/ government"
So, how does one reconcile the 78^% apparently in favour with the 48% who believe that cameras are merely a revenue generator?
I'll leave you to ponder this. I have CCed the Association of British Drivers on this email as I believe they'll be most interested in rebuking your slanted reportage.
regards
And I've just had a reply from one of the guys at the ABD:
quote:Good stuff...
I've already spoken on Talk Radio this morning about this and am about to go onto BBC Radio London's afternoon show for another session. There's a chance of two more BBC local stations this evening (not
confirmed yet) on the same topic. Hugh Bladon has already been on BBC Radio Humberside talking about the report. I think Brian Gregory has also spoken on air today. We're rebutting as hard as we can.
...and on this same angle...
These figures are completely pointless without quoting the exact wording of the question.* Which I think is the main reason that the results get twisted so badly by reporters.(Who incidently, IMHO, often just put across whichever interpretation they feel will be most controversial, hence building their "hard-hitting" reputation.)
And as someone hinted at, the demographics of the victims/respondents need to be made clear.
*e.g.
"Which do you think are worse:
A - speed cameras, or
B - automated speeder-seeking missiles?
"
These figures are completely pointless without quoting the exact wording of the question.* Which I think is the main reason that the results get twisted so badly by reporters.(Who incidently, IMHO, often just put across whichever interpretation they feel will be most controversial, hence building their "hard-hitting" reputation.)
And as someone hinted at, the demographics of the victims/respondents need to be made clear.
*e.g.
"Which do you think are worse:
A - speed cameras, or
B - automated speeder-seeking missiles?
"
Well, that would depend on whether you wanted amusing questions, or to get something with more statistical weight than the crappy skewed questions that the RAC asked.. eg:
1) Do you consider speed cameras to be a good thing?
2) Have you ever been caught and fined as a result of a speed camera?
2b) Would you still consider cameras to be a good thing if you had been caught and banned as a result?
3) With the current manner of deployment in mind, do the advantages of cameras outweigh the disadvantages?
4) Do cameras serve a useful purpose in National Speed Limit areas?
5) Do cameras serve a useful purpose on Motorways?
6) Do you consider cameras a good substitute for traffic police?
etc...
with some refinement a more credible set of stats could be gleaned.. the important factor is not to lump two quite different questions together as in the 78% question above...
1) Do you consider speed cameras to be a good thing?
2) Have you ever been caught and fined as a result of a speed camera?
2b) Would you still consider cameras to be a good thing if you had been caught and banned as a result?
3) With the current manner of deployment in mind, do the advantages of cameras outweigh the disadvantages?
4) Do cameras serve a useful purpose in National Speed Limit areas?
5) Do cameras serve a useful purpose on Motorways?
6) Do you consider cameras a good substitute for traffic police?
etc...
with some refinement a more credible set of stats could be gleaned.. the important factor is not to lump two quite different questions together as in the 78% question above...
I agree that the survey was slanted to produce results backing the use of speed cameras. It probably has a lot to do with who funds the research. Perhaps the RAC were paid by the government to carry out this research.
If they weren't, then I wonder what they were thinking of. A practical way to make feelings known might be to campaign against using the RAC, by depicting them as pro-speed camera. This would certainly make me less inclined to use their services.
If they weren't, then I wonder what they were thinking of. A practical way to make feelings known might be to campaign against using the RAC, by depicting them as pro-speed camera. This would certainly make me less inclined to use their services.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff