Image of person walking along a railway track: overreaction or sensible?

[ooo]

I recently saw this tweet from the satire website The Daily Mash which prompted an angry backlash from many in the rail industry.

Would anyone really take this seriously?

Personally I doubt anyone would and it's clearly a joke.

twitter.com/thedailymash/status/1064481022551777280?s=19

Commuters get to work quicker than usual by walking along the tracks
https://t.co/BZcwqV4iQO https://t.co/h8aPd7ombk

Edited to add quote

 

[robbeech]

Whilst we all see this is said in jest it is clear from the reactions that people are unhappy with this. Of course there will be people here who will claim people need to get over themselves and accept it. In this case I think there seems to be enough people unhappy to warrant thinking twice about these sorts of posts.

 

[kristiang85]

I do despair if people think that will actually make people walk along the tracks!

Then again, in Sri Lanka earlier this year I was told to walk along the tracks to navigate my way along a trek. I got some great photos right next to moving locomotives. Ah, the joys of travel.

 

[big all]

whilst most will know its not a good idea 99.9999%----------

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Daily Mash is satire. Don't take it seriously. If it (or any other satirical publication) serves to rile, don't read it.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Whilst we all see this is said in jest it is clear from the reactions that people are unhappy with this. Of course there will be people here who will claim people need to get over themselves and accept it. In this case I think there seems to be enough people unhappy to warrant thinking twice about these sorts of posts.

I count 8 people moaning about it. If 8 people in the world moaning about something is enough to “warrant thinking twice” about anything we live in very sad and worrying times.

 

[robbeech]

It seems to be the majority of replies so 8 or 8000 isn’t necessarily relevant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems to be the majority of replies so 8 or 8000 isn’t necessarily relevant.

People don't typically reply "I like this article" in text.

 

[al78]

I count 8 people moaning about it. If 8 people in the world moaning about something is enough to “warrant thinking twice” about anything we live in very sad and worrying times.

The issue is whether the article trivialises trespassing on the railway, and so may induce some of the idiotic end of the population to decide to do it if they personally felt it convenient. The number of people moaning about it on one twitter feed is irrelevant.

 

[sprinterguy]

People don't typically reply "I like this article" in text.

Yes exactly; the tweet has garnered 80 'Likes', so ten times the number of people have expressed amusement as opposed to their disapproval.

 

[Bantamzen]

The issue is whether the article trivialises trespassing on the railway, and so may induce some of the idiotic end of the population to decide to do it if they personally felt it convenient. The number of people moaning about it on one twitter feed is irrelevant.

Truthfully, if someone is the sort of person that is likely to trespass, then this article on a very satirical site is not going have any real influence, and the same could be said of someone suffering depression and considering suicide. So are some of the reactions overstated? Possibly, though I do understand that it might not be the best reading for someone that has suffered the direct consequences of trespass incidents.

 

[cuccir]

I mean it's clearly satire. It talks of trackside cafes opening.

"Makeshift trackside cafes and shops sprung up, causing many to abandon their jobs in the city and become a barista just outside Surbiton or an artisanal baker in Earlsfield."

Nothing in it can be taken as an endorsement of walking on railway tracks; it is so patently ridiculous and silly as to be too far from any real life event.

 

[a_c_skinner]

You see a good deal of "artistic" photography which features people on railways. I take an absolutist line. Stop it. Now.

 

[Intermodal]

You see a good deal of "artistic" photography which features people on railways. I take an absolutist line. Stop it. Now.

At the end of the day though, the UK is in the minority worldwide in that people are absolutely prohibited from going on the tracks. Not much you can do to change that.

Whilst I recognise how this post could be very upsetting to some I really think starting to censor satire on that basis is a dark road to go down.

 

[Journeyman]

I think the biggest problem here has been the huge rise in self-detrainment as soon as a train sits down somewhere for whatever reason. It becomes a major issue because as soon as it happens, the whole thing gets very hard to control and creates all sorts of hazards. If a train is stuck at a signal close to a station, you can guarantee that after a short period, someone will be at least thinking about using a door release and walking up the track.

 

[Ken H]

At the end of the day though, the UK is in the minority worldwide in that people are absolutely prohibited from going on the tracks. Not much you can do to change that.

Whilst I recognise how this post could be very upsetting to some I really think starting to censor satire on that basis is a dark road to go down.

and of course immigrants from countries where tracks are not fenced but are a unofficial highway are a bigger problem than people reading Daily Mash tweets.
I was on the M25 last year and saw several groups of non whites walking on the hard shoulder in the rush hour. Plod were having a right old job rounding them up. How do you round up a bus load of people on a motorway who dont want rounding up?

 

[robbeech]

People don't typically reply "I like this article" in text.

A very valid point.

 

[kristiang85]

Another one that's come up this week, although more official:

https://news.sky.com/story/poster-o...r-wifes-murder-ruled-legal-in-france-11559916

Posters of a woman tied to train tracks in an advert for high-speed trains were not promoting violence against women, a French court has ruled.

The poster shows a woman screaming at the camera with her hands bound and rope around her torso and feet. It is captioned: "With the TGV, she would have suffered less."

The adverts were displayed in Beziers, southern France, in December last year to draw attention to the arrival of TGV trans service.

 

[westv]

I think the biggest problem here has been the huge rise in self-detrainment as soon as a train sits down somewhere for whatever reason. It becomes a major issue because as soon as it happens, the whole thing gets very hard to control and creates all sorts of hazards. If a train is stuck at a signal close to a station, you can guarantee that after a short period, someone will be at least thinking about using a door release and walking up the track.

Has there been a huge rise?

 

[Dr_Paul]

I highly doubt that many people will view this article other than as a satirical piece. It's taking the mickey out of repeated delays on the railways, and especially last Monday's fiasco on South-Western, not poking fun at people who have killed themselves on railways or come to grief whilst trespassing.

As it is, I was shocked by something I read that close to 50 000 people have been killed by being hit by trains in India over the last three years: that's around 45 every day. Quite a few people are also killed by falling off trains: when one sees the footage of people riding on buffer-beams, running boards and roofs, I'm not surprised.

 

[DarloRich]

CLEARLY the article is not meant to encourage people walking on the railway line. It is from what is held to be a satirical website. Personally I think it is fairly childish and silly but each to their own.

However for many of the people who have commented this will be an issue close to home. For some it will be very personal. After all it isnt the people chuckling at this superb humour that have to go and look for body parts after someone has been hit by a train or be the driver who has to live with having hit someone.

For most posters here that is just a concept. For some it is a reality. That is why they feel a bit upset.

 

[al78]

CLEARLY the article is not mean to encourage people walking on the railway line. It is from what is held to be a satirical website. Personally i think it is fairly childish and silly but each to their own.

However for many of the people who have commented this will be an issue close OT home. For some it will be very personal. After all it isnt the people chuckling at this superb humour that have to go and look for body parts after someone has been hit by a train or be the driver who has to live with having hit someone.

For most posters here that is just a concept. For some it is a reality. That is why they feel a bit upset.

This is an excellent way of putting it.

 

[dcbwhaley]

CLEARLY the article is not meant to encourage people walking on the railway line. It is from what is held to be a satirical website. Personally I think it is fairly childish and silly but each to their own.

However for many of the people who have commented this will be an issue close to home. For some it will be very personal. After all it isnt the people chuckling at this superb humour that have to go and look for body parts after someone has been hit by a train or be the driver who has to live with having hit someone.

For most posters here that is just a concept. For some it is a reality. That is why they feel a bit upset.

But if you take the view that you shouldn't print or post anything that upsets someone who has suffered, the newspapers would be very thin indeed.

 

[DarloRich]

But if you take the view that you shouldn't print or post anything that upsets someone who has suffered, the newspapers would be very thin indeed.

can you point to where i have said that they should not publish satirical articles? I don't think i have said or implied such a thing. I have merely tried to explain why some commentators may have been unhappy with that posting.

As an aside this is why i find this bored tedious at times - the obvious has to be stated obviously!

 

[dcbwhaley]

can you point to where i have said that they should not publish satirical articles? I don't think i have said or implied such a thing. I have merely tried to explain why some commentators may have been unhappy with that posting.

As an aside this is why i find this bored tedious at times - the obvious has to be stated obviously!

Your first sentence is a non sequiter.
Your last sentence, once the spelling is corrected, begs the point that what is obvious to one person may be obscure to another.

 

[urbophile]

The Daily Mash is usually spot on with its satire. But I don't think this one is either in any way funny, or in good taste. There are many other ways of satirising the disarray and inefficiency of our railway system without that. However I remember once seeing a cartoon of a whole trainful of commuters walking in train-seating formation along the track. That was funnier because it is surreal and because no-one would be likely to emulate it IRL. To show, as this does, a single person – whether suicidal or just stupid – walking in the path of a train is disrespectful to the dead and encouraging to idiots.

 

[DarloRich]

Your first sentence is a non sequiter.
Your last sentence, once the spelling is corrected, begs the point that what is obvious to one person may be obscure to another.

So no you can't. Thanks for the confirmation. At no point did I suggest that this silly web site shouldn't publish such things. I merely tried to explain why people who have to deal with the aftermath of deaths on the railway might be a bit unhappy. That should not need spelling out!l


Ps in future I will try and ensure my dyslexia doesn't upset pedants.

 

[Edders23]

I can understand people who have had bad experiences being upset but satire is not meant to be completely inoffensive

That said I remember visiting the great central railway once and a photographer and some models came onto the line to do a photo shoot with trains passing in the background the reaction of the staff whilst not kindly to the trespassers wasn't an over reaction more a case of get off the line please or we'll call the police

 

[gallafent]

Your first sentence is a non sequiter.

I guess you mean non sequitur. Best to be careful when criticising others' grammar / spelling etc., glasshouses and stones, pots and kettles, and all that.

Pro tip, a decent English spellchecker will allow you sequitur but not sequiter, even though it's a Latin word.

 

[HaggisBotherer]

On one side, satire is supposed to get up people's noses, that's the point of it.
On the other people who have had experience of picking up the pieces (literally) may find it in poor taste.
Back on the first side we live in a sociaty where the internet has bred a culture of people who seem to actively look for something to be offended about in everything.

Ultimately it's tomorrow's chip paper and, I suggest, far less harmful to society at large than an awful lot of what can be found on t'internet.