3 ms·

> an SUV drove into a sidewalk As usual, this us worded as "the car did it", also known as the "absent driver" style. More examples here https://twitter.com/a

> an SUV drove into a sidewalk As usual, this us worded as "the car did it", also known as the "absent driver" style. More examples here https://twitter.com/absentdriver https://twitter.com/absentdriver

aequitas 7y ago
Makes sense for reporters to play it safe I think, as what the car did is a clearly observable fact. Wording it like "The driver drove his car into the sidewalk" portraits the sense the driver deliberately performed the action. While other circumstances might be a play. Better to wait for official investigation to clarify this.
- robben1234 7y ago
  It doesn't matter if it's deliberate action or not, cars do not drive themselves into accidents. The same logic, the car not driver, used for subject of the ban. Ban reckless driving and dangerous behavior. SUV ban won't stop accidents like these. At best they will achieve less injuries because the cars being drove into pedestrians gonna get smaller.
- SideburnsOfDoom 7y ago
  > portraits the sense the driver deliberately performed the action. Agreed, it's more likely that the driver lost control of their vehicle. The car has was not an autonomous vehicle, so it has no agency here: it did not do anything at all.
jessaustin 7y ago
This is at least better than a totally passive style, like "four people were killed", which is used just below that caption. In this case the headline writer does a better job than the author, using "crash" while TFA has: 1 x "collision", 5 x "incident", 8 x "accident". To be clear, "accident" is an inaccurate word in this context. It seems remotely possible although certainly not likely that a 42yo man could have the first seizure event of his life while driving near pedestrians, so that small aspect of this crash could have been accidental. However, he certainly didn't "accidentally" drive an SUV through a dense urban area. Using the inaccurate term is prejudicial.

aequitas 7y ago

Makes sense for reporters to play it safe I think, as what the car did is a clearly observable fact. Wording it like "The driver drove his car into the sidewalk" portraits the sense the driver deliberately performed the action. While other circumstances might be a play. Better to wait for official investigation to clarify this.

robben1234 7y ago
It doesn't matter if it's deliberate action or not, cars do not drive themselves into accidents. The same logic, the car not driver, used for subject of the ban. Ban reckless driving and dangerous behavior. SUV ban won't stop accidents like these. At best they will achieve less injuries because the cars being drove into pedestrians gonna get smaller.
SideburnsOfDoom 7y ago
> portraits the sense the driver deliberately performed the action. Agreed, it's more likely that the driver lost control of their vehicle. The car has was not an autonomous vehicle, so it has no agency here: it did not do anything at all.

jessaustin 7y ago

This is at least better than a totally passive style, like "four people were killed", which is used just below that caption. In this case the headline writer does a better job than the author, using "crash" while TFA has: 1 x "collision", 5 x "incident", 8 x "accident". To be clear, "accident" is an inaccurate word in this context. It seems remotely possible although certainly not likely that a 42yo man could have the first seizure event of his life while driving near pedestrians, so that small aspect of this crash could have been accidental. However, he certainly didn't "accidentally" drive an SUV through a dense urban area. Using the inaccurate term is prejudicial.