Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Oct 29, 2025 02:47

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 13:36 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 11:36
Posts: 113
Location: Lincolnshire
http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArt ... ID=1277781


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 14:33 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 00:11
Posts: 764
Location: Sofa
Link to the ASA Adjudication I'm guessing this is the same story - I can't get the above link to work :(

Highlights:
The poster breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

We considered that the picture of the camera, the sign "=" and the pictures of the gravestones and the text "WHEN YOU SEE ONE OF THESE ... IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST FOUR OF THESE" suggested that, wherever a consumer saw a speed camera, there had been at least four deaths at that location. We considered that the text "Speed control safety cameras are installed on roads where there have been at least four fatal or very serious crashes" at the bottom of the poster suggested that speed cameras could also be installed on roads where there had been serious, not fatal, crashes, but considered that that suggestion contradicted the headline claim and pictures.

We considered that the pictures of the camera and gravestones and the claim "WHEN YOU SEE ONE OF THESE ... IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST FOUR OF THESE", and the claim "Speed control safety cameras are installed on roads where there have been at least four fatal or very serious crashes" were misleading. We noted the poster was no longer appearing but told WYCRP not to repeat the approach and advised them to contact the CAP Copy Advice team when preparing future similar advertising.

_________________
Less Kodak, more Kojak.
In times of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 15:23 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 16:34
Posts: 923
Location: UK
Good old West Yorks, it's probably one of Philip Gwynne's ideas, the weasel wording is like some of the other stuff he comes out with.

At least one of the complainants was from Pistonheads.com

Gareth


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 15:25 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
Alsohere

Quote:
Full text of the Ruling --
Date: 7th December 2005
Media: Poster
Sector: Non-commercial

Public Complaints From: Buckinghamshire, West Yorkshire

Complaint:

Objections to a poster for the West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction Partnership. The poster showed a picture of a camera, the sign "=" and pictures of four gravestones with the letters "RIP" on each. Text below stated "WHEN YOU SEE ONE OF THESE (a picture of a camera was shown) IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST FOUR OF THESE (a picture of a gravestone with the letters "RIP" on it was shown). Text at the bottom of the poster stated "Speed control safety cameras are installed on roads where there have been at least four fatal or very serious crashes." The complainants, who believed speed cameras were placed on roads for a number of reasons, challenged whether the poster misleadingly implied that speed cameras were installed on roads only where there had been at least four deaths.

Codes Section: 3.1, 7.1 (Ed 11)

Adjudication:


Complaints upheld
The West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction Partnership (WYCRP) said the poster contained a visual representation of one of the principal criteria that governed the installation of speed control safety cameras. They explained that the criteria were described in the Department for Transport's (DfTs') Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales for 2005-06, published in November 2004. They sent an extract from the Handbook; it stated that there must have been at least four killed and seriously injured (KSI) collisions at each proposed core camera site for 2005-06. WYCRP believed the poster was educational and informative, not misleading, because it communicated that speed cameras could only be sited at locations where there had been at least four crashes resulting in death or serious injury. They said the poster was no longer appearing.

We considered that the picture of the camera, the sign "=" and the pictures of the gravestones and the text "WHEN YOU SEE ONE OF THESE ... IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST FOUR OF THESE" suggested that, wherever a consumer saw a speed camera, there had been at least four deaths at that location. We considered that the text "Speed control safety cameras are installed on roads where there have been at least four fatal or very serious crashes" at the bottom of the poster suggested that speed cameras could also be installed on roads where there had been serious, not fatal, crashes, but considered that that suggestion contradicted the headline claim and pictures.

We studied the DfT's Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales for 2005-06. We noted, although it stated that there must have been at least four KSI collisions at each proposed core camera site for 2005-06, it also stated " ... These rules do not apply retrospectively to existing sites, the approval of which would have been justified on the basis of the requirements at the time of commissioning ...". We considered that the claim "WHEN YOU SEE ONE OF THESE ... IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST FOUR OF THESE" and the pictures of the camera and the gravestones did not make clear that the rule applied only to new, not to existing, camera sites. Moreover, we noted the Handbook explained that cameras could be installed at the request of the local community if traffic speeds at a particular site were causing concern for road safety. The Handbook also explained that, if a site had a high incidence of Personal Injury Collisions (PIC) and there was well-founded concern that a failure to reduce speeds at that site would result in future increases in KSI collisions, including deaths, a speed camera could be installed even if there were currently insufficient KSI collisions to meet the criteria. We noted speed cameras could also be installed as a short-term measure where roads, or parts of roads, did not meet minimum engineering requirements or where temporary speed limits had been imposed because of roadworks. We considered that the pictures of the camera and gravestones and the claim "WHEN YOU SEE ONE OF THESE ... IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST FOUR OF THESE", and the claim "Speed control safety cameras are installed on roads where there have been at least four fatal or very serious crashes" were misleading. We noted the poster was no longer appearing but told WYCRP not to repeat the approach and advised them to contact the CAP Copy Advice team when preparing future similar advertising.

The poster breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).



Its official ... scammers lie!

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 16:13 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 20:14
Posts: 252
Location: Hampshire
WYCRAP? best set of initials I have seen.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 23:10 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
The ASA wrote:
We noted the poster was no longer appearing


I am sure I have seen it more recently than 7th December.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 03:06 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 16:34
Posts: 923
Location: UK
Homer wrote:
The ASA wrote:
We noted the poster was no longer appearing


I am sure I have seen it more recently than 7th December.


Keep a camera handy, take a photo and send it to the ASA.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 19:09 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 21:39
Posts: 140
Location: St Annes
Somebody has just posted on PH (Speed plod & law section - so registration required) about seeing this poster on a bus. Topic - West Yorkshire SCP Poster

I'm waiting for a reply from the original poster to check that this was a recent sighting.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 19:13 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
send a freedom of information request to the bus companies.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 20:23 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
I think a critical lie has been overlooked.

You can put a camera up anywhere, antime. You just cannot rake in the money from it.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 20:27 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 16:34
Posts: 923
Location: UK
anton wrote:
send a freedom of information request to the bus companies.


I am pretty sure they aren't covered because they aren't a public body.

Better would be a FoI request to the SCP asking whether they instructed the advertising agency to remove the adverts, and whether they followed it up later checking that they had ALL been removed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.035s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]