06-13-2018, 11:27 AM
(06-13-2018, 11:07 AM)KevinL Wrote: "Accident" gives too much of a sense that it was all due to random chance. Often it's not the case; someone made a poor choice that led to this happening (whether distracted driving, speeding, poor movement on the road, failure to signal, or whatever). "Crash" gives a more flat and open indication of the occurrence, and leaves room for a causation to be applied later.
Indeed, saying something like "Cyclist involved in accident with pickup" does many things, as an example headline. Using "Cyclist" or "bike" dehumanizes the victim, because of how people react to those terms. "Accident" begins the mental perception of what occurred in the same way one says "oh it was an accident" when something happens, beginning by shunning responsibility. "Pickup" distances the reader from that which causes the most damage in any collision, by distancing them (by referring to vehicle type instead of to a person).
The same kind of accident could also be referred to in this way: "Woman killed in bike lane by driver who fled the scene" "Woman" humanizes the victim. "Driver" brings responsibility back to the person using the vehicle which caused the death.
In this case, the death in Toronto of Isabel Soria has shown be basically these two headline types. If you are going to pick up a gun, or the leading instrument of death in a country (vehicles, in nearly every case), you have to acknowledge that you bear great responsibility for the use of such a deadly thing. Using such a deadly thing does not make you a bad person, but it requires the greatest responsibility, especially in areas where there is not exclusive vehicle use (like highways are). We use too much forgiving language, and I do believe people are right to call out Mayor Tory for his "thoughts" being with the victim, because at this point, it's a very close equivalent to American "thoughts and prayers" over every death by gun.