A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 9th 17, 01:35 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
michael adams[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum


"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...

I always thought that warnings about CCTV were there to make it legal to use the
footage in court, not to make it legal to publish it in general.


I thought warnings about CCTV were so as to discourage potential miscreants
who might not otherwise have noticed the presence of the camera. Or might
even substitute for an actual working camera.

Same as with burglar alarm notices.


michael adams

....


  #12  
Old October 9th 17, 01:48 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Scott[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 13:18:37 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 09/10/2017 08:02, alan_m wrote:
On 09/10/2017 04:00, Bill Wright wrote:
I haven't seen any. Seems odd.

Bill


Possibly because:
i) It wasn't terrorism
ii) It was an accident and the Police are not lo1oking for the driver
iii) All parties involved have been identified

But it was news, and anyone with CCTV could make a bit by selling to a
broadcaster or a newspaper website.

Sell - I would have donated in the public interest.
  #13  
Old October 9th 17, 01:58 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,187
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

"Scott" wrote in message
...
Sell - I would have donated in the public interest.


If I was ever in the position of being the only person to film a newsworthy
event, I would offer it to the news agencies on the non-negotiable condition
that they do not have exclusive rights to it and that I will be offering it
also to other broadcasters and expect payment from anyone who uses it - and
I will walk away from any company that says "we will pay you extra if you
give us exclusive rights".

I remember years ago being first on the scene (apart from the ambulance and
fire brigade) at a damage-only collision and car fire. I happened to have my
camera with me, so I took a few photos, developed them in my darkroom and
went round to the various free newspapers in town asking whether they were
interested in buying the photos. The first paper, the weekly one, tried the
"exclusive deal" line and I said "not interested". They upped the cost so I
said "it's not the money, it's the exclusive part of the deal that I'm not
interested in" and walked away.

I eventually sold the photo (for a pittance!) to one of their competitors,
and opted for a by-line in lieu of payment from a third paper - I'd got what
I wanted: a bit of money and a bit of publicity. The Bucks Herald lost their
chance to print the photo because they wanted to be greedy and have
exclusive rights to it.

  #14  
Old October 9th 17, 05:41 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Nightjar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

On 09-Oct-17 1:18 PM, Bill Wright wrote:
On 09/10/2017 08:02, alan_m wrote:
On 09/10/2017 04:00, Bill Wright wrote:
I haven't seen any. Seems odd.

Bill


Possibly because:
i) It wasn't terrorism
ii) It was an accident and the Police are not lo1oking for the driver
iii) All parties involved have been identified

But it was news, and anyone with CCTV could make a bit by selling to a
broadcaster or a newspaper website.


It was an RTC where people were injured, which makes it an ongoing
police investigation. It probably isn't sufficiently newsworthy to risk
publishing potential evidence.

--
--

Colin Bignell
  #15  
Old October 9th 17, 05:42 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,807
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

The most annoying thing this bit of culture has made is the demise of the
newspaper photographer. Instead most publications use Facebook or a cloud
service for the publics pictures and simply sit at their desks pulling them
off and using them and also calling the people who were there forquotes.
It reminded me of the old Savilles Travels on the radio, where in the main
he was in the studio and not anywhere near the people, probably a good thing
in hindsight.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"MR" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 9 October 2017 04:00:14 UTC+1, wrote:
I haven't seen any. Seems odd.

Bill


No doubt the sickos with their phone cameras were hanging around the
injured until the police shooed them away.

MR



  #16  
Old October 9th 17, 08:13 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,187
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news
The most annoying thing this bit of culture has made is the demise of the
newspaper photographer. Instead most publications use Facebook or a cloud
service for the publics pictures and simply sit at their desks pulling
them off and using them and also calling the people who were there
forquotes.
It reminded me of the old Savilles Travels on the radio, where in the
main he was in the studio and not anywhere near the people, probably a
good thing in hindsight.


I have met Savile twice in my life.

The first time was when he was working as a part-time porter at the Leeds
General Infirmary in the late 60s or very early 70s. I fell in the
playground when I collided with another boy as we were both sliding on the
ice in the playground. Since I'd been concussed and temporarily lost my
sight (frightening at the age of about 7) mum took me to hospital. JS
wheeled me into X-ray and he was very matey in a rather OTT and strangely
worrying way (at that age I had no understanding of sexual abuse). As he was
helping me out of the wheelchair I repaid his kindness by puking all over
him :-) The memory of that now makes me think he got what he deserved :-)

The second time was when I was in my late teens or early twenties. My mum
worked in the pharmacy at Stoke Mandeville Hospital and everyone was called
in one weekend to help with final preparations to open the new Spinal Unit,
and to push trolleys of supplies through the corridors to the new building.
I remember my dad was in great demand because he is a qualified pharmacist:
though he has worked all his life in pharmaceutical research, apart from the
first year or so during which he met my mum, he still satisfies the legal
requirement of being another qualified pharmacist (even though not employed
by the hospital) who could satisfy the legal requirement to accompany
trolleys of Controlled Drugs as they were being transported through the
corridors to the Spinal Unit.

JS was there helping (and he *did* help, not just encouraging from the
sidelines) and gave a rather OTT thank you speech to everyone afterwards.
Even as a man, he gave me the creeps, for reasons that I couldn't quite work
out. My sister, who is three years younger, felt very anxious around him and
commented "he's horrible" - we noticed that a lot of the younger women were
displaying similar body language of distaste and revulsion, even though he
was nowhere near them. It was the older women who tended to "mother" him and
to be in awe of him - but then he would have had no interest in them...

  #17  
Old October 9th 17, 10:13 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,909
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

On 09/10/2017 13:37, NY wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 09/10/2017 08:02, alan_m wrote:
On 09/10/2017 04:00, Bill Wright wrote:
I haven't seen any. Seems odd.

Bill

Possibly because:
i) It wasn't terrorism
ii) It was an accident and the Police are not lo1oking for the driver
iii) All parties involved have been identified

But it was news, and anyone with CCTV could make a bit by selling to a
broadcaster or a newspaper website.


The fact that this hasn't happened makes me suspicious that the police
have instructed newspapers not to publish footage. Of course, once it
was announced that it was not a terrorist incident, the incident became
less newsworthy, but until then I'd have thought the people with footage
which showed what happened might have released it to the papers.

What is the current situation as regarded suspected terrorist attacks:
do the police immediately issue a D Notice (or whatever the modern
equivalent is) banning publication until there has been further
analysis, after which it is not "news" if it is only an accident and not
a terrorist incident.

And what about private publication on Youtube etc? Do the police issue
immediate "takedown" instructions to Youtube? Now that it's not
terrorist, maybe some footage will come to light.

Was he an idiot who couldn't read the road and turned too soon onto a
pavement, or did he have some sort of medical incident that led to the
car going out of control? I wonder if it was the dreaded problem with
automatic cars of the driver hitting the accelerator instead of the
brake and then not being able to stop quickly enough (the "elderly
person driving into a shop window" type of accident - though I believe
this guy was not elderly).

Very impressive that armed police were on hand to react so quickly. I
imagine that the Kensington museums are seen as a likely target so there
may be police on standby close by.


At last a reasoned response.

Bill
  #18  
Old October 10th 17, 05:15 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,909
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

On 09/10/2017 23:44, Martin wrote:
There was no shortage of press and TV photo and video coverage. Examples
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ran-lives.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41538762
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-10-07/i...istory-museum/

Maybe Bill needs to visit Specsavers.


**** off Martin. I'm talking about video of the actual incident. The car
entering the area and running people over.

Anyway I don't use Specsavers for this reason:

"Disabled readers and their carers should be aware that Specsavers on St
Sepulchre Gate have a new policy. They no longer allow disability
scooters, even very small ones, into the shop. On Wednesday 6th I was
told that I must take my small scooter outside immediately. They are
unconditionally banned from the shop. In the past I’ve simply left my
scooter in a corner of the entrance foyer and used one of the shop’s
manual chairs. This has worked well.

I wasn’t prepared to leave the scooter outside because disability
scooters are expensive and if left unattended are not covered by the
insurance. There was an outdoor market in the street with all sorts of
people roaming about.

Although the shop knew when I made the appointment that I am disabled, I
was not warned that disability scooters are not allowed inside the shop.

The manager would not even allow me to put the scooter somewhere out of
the way in a storeroom or office.

There’s absolutely no valid excuse for banning scooters from the shop. I
expect they’ll cite that good old all-purpose excuse ‘Health and Safety’
but that’s nonsense. My suspicion is that Doncaster Specsavers is
actively discouraging disabled customers because they can’t be bothered
to take the extra bit of trouble to cater for them. The operation of the
stairlift to take disabled customers to the lower floor seems to need
two staff members. There is no stairlift to the upper floor, so to
perform an eye test downstairs the optician has to leave his usual
consultation room. I have sensed in the past that as a disabled person I
am regarded as an inconvenience. Luckily there are other opticians in
town with better premises and better attitudes to disability."

Bill

  #19  
Old October 10th 17, 08:27 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Chris B[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

On 09/10/2017 13:37, NY wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 09/10/2017 08:02, alan_m wrote:
On 09/10/2017 04:00, Bill Wright wrote:
I haven't seen any. Seems odd.



Very impressive that armed police were on hand to react so quickly. I
imagine that the Kensington museums are seen as a likely target so there
may be police on standby close by.


I think that there is an embassy (I think French) literally across the
road from the NH museum. There are usually 2 or 3 armed police
stationed outside.


--
Chris B (News)
  #20  
Old October 12th 17, 11:40 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Nightjar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum

On 09-Oct-17 11:34 PM, Martin wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 18:41:20 +0100, Nightjar wrote:

On 09-Oct-17 1:18 PM, Bill Wright wrote:
On 09/10/2017 08:02, alan_m wrote:
On 09/10/2017 04:00, Bill Wright wrote:
I haven't seen any. Seems odd.

Bill

Possibly because:
i) It wasn't terrorism
ii) It was an accident and the Police are not lo1oking for the driver
iii) All parties involved have been identified

But it was news, and anyone with CCTV could make a bit by selling to a
broadcaster or a newspaper website.


It was an RTC where people were injured, which makes it an ongoing
police investigation. It probably isn't sufficiently newsworthy to risk
publishing potential evidence.


The press had lots of photos taken immediately after the accident. I am pretty
sure some of the photos were also shown in TV news programmes.


Photos taken after the event only show the result of the collision,
which is not evidence of how it occurred. CCTV footage is.

--
--

Colin Bignell
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.