Reflections

I see that one of the passengers on the doomed coach which crashed recently claimed that it had been travelling at 80mph on the slip road between the M4 and the M25.

A tachograph reading confirmed that the speed of the coach before the crash was in fact 62mph.

We are notoriously bad at reporting on things that happen. The game ‘Chinese Whispers’ demonstrates that only too clearly. Now it can be regarded as a simple human frailty. But why, if we are not certain about something, do we insist on making definitive statements?

Had there been something wrong with the tachograph, that passenger’s comments could have been enough to convinct the driver.

And why, when we are reporting incorrectly on things, do we insist on exaggerating?

It seems that some rumours are spread by compulsive liars, because they could not spontaneously appear any other way. I was on a train a few years ago which nearly derailed at high speed after hitting a cow. Not fifteen minutes after the incident, two stories were current: one, that we had hit a cow, two, that a pedestrian had jumped from a footbridge and under the train.

Let us admit our frailties. We cannot describe accurately something that happened to us five minutes ago. Ok, fair enough. Let us then admit that we are not sure, rather than making up some dramatic tale that suits our own sense of self-importance.

I have fortunately not been exposed much to television advertising lately, but that has changed with my acquisition of a new TV card.

I have noticed a new tendency with the way that advertisers refer to amounts of money. It varies according to whether it is a price or a claimed saving. If it’s a claimed saving, they will use the word “hundred”. So you will save, for example, four hundred and fifty-six pounds. However, if the item costs that amount, it will be “Only four, five, six”.

Are we really so stupid that when we hear small numbers we think of the quantity as being small also?  Sadly, because advertising is based on results, the answer must be “yes”.