Sunday, 27 March 2011

Day 178

I've booked a train home for next week, but apparently East Coast is already having problems without me getting involved.

East Coast rail delays spark passenger anger

Yes fair enough, I don't get why it's the most read article on BBC News but I do get why delays = anger. Just look how Mussolini reacted. But it's some of the language in the article that has me double-taking.

"They have complained of being left to fend for themselves."

"The company had tried to keep passengers informed by sending members of staff to York station."

"'They ran out of food, it was very cold and we didn't know what was happening'".

... okay hold on a minute, we are in 2011 aren't we? What were they "fending for themselves" against? Wildcats? Dingos? Natives? And what do they mean by "sending members of staff to York station"? What, they walked along the rails or something? Couldn't they be kept informed by that newfangled device that goes "ring ring"? And if they "ran out of food" why didn't they just go foraging for nuts and berries.

I don't know why the whole thing is such a big deal; most of us have similar experiences of train platforms anyway. Besides, the bottom line is that being stranded makes a good anecdote. Everyone knows that. I suppose the problem is that being quoted on the BBC News makes a better punchline to the anecdote than "it wasn't that bad anyway, I had some crisps and met a lovely lady in the picnic basket weaving trade".

No comments:

Post a Comment