On Nov 23, 6:06*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 00:06:38 -0800 (PST), MIG

wrote:
On good form today with reports of South Eastern services suspended
between Shepherds Bush and Milton Keynes.

Their willingness to repeat nonsense for bulletin after bulletin is
often less obviously workable out than that one, like the time that
they kept announcing that services on the "Lewisham line" were being
diverted, when they meant that services between Dartford and Lewisham
via Bexleyheath were being diverted via Sidcup (rather important for
punters to know that they were NOT going via Bexleyheath, but WERE
going via Lewisham).

They do this sort of thing over and over. *The newsreaders just keep
on dumbly reading it out every half hour. *You'd think that the London
travel newsroom would have some vague idea about transport in London.

While I understand the point you make I think you have unrealistic
expectations. I think, but am happy to be corrected, that the BBC simply
gets a feed from the respective websites for NR and TfL plus whatever is
reported for roads. The terminology that they use is just about
identical to whatever is shown on digital teletext which usually aligns
with web info. *If the source info is poorly described in terms of
location, impact and expected duration then that will simply be
repeated.

I don't think television news broadcasters are expected to add anything
to "official" information. I would imagine their response to you would
be - "we get the info from an official source. Surely it is their
responsibility to provide accurate and coherent info to the public?
They *do* *know* what is going on on their railway or road don't they?"

Not ideal I accept but would you really want artistic licence sprinkled
on top of your morning transport information?

--
Paul C

No, but maybe someone in the newsroom on seeing that the bulletin was
nonsense might have made the odd phone call or something to find out
what was really happening.

Or if they really can't even do that, why bother at all?