Travellers face Eurostar disruption if there's no Brexit deal - MSE News

zagfles wrote: »

Thank you for publishing this, and please carry on publishing stories like this, suggest you ignore the odd few whingers who seem to get very defensive at any hint that Brexit might have any negative consequence. We need to be prepared, just like with passports etc.

I don't have any problem with it being published or with being prepared.
It's the biased slant and sensationalism that irritates - it's like 'Project Fear' all over again!

jackieblack wrote: »

I don't have any problem with it being published or with being prepared.
It's the biased slant and sensationalism that irritates - it's like 'Project Fear' all over again!

Sensationalist? Seriously?? It was "Travellers face disruption" and "Netflix might not work".

If you think that's "sensational" you need to get out more

eDicky wrote: »

There's nothing particularly sensational about Callum's headline, which simply points out a definite possibility. Many people rely on the Eurostar service.

If the headline had been Travellers may face disruption or Travellers face possible disruption, then I would agree. But stating something as fact when it is only a possibility is sensationalism.

sensationalism
sɛnˈseɪʃ(ə)n(ə)lɪz(ə)m/
noun
1.
(especially in journalism) the presentation of stories in a way that is intended to provoke public interest or excitement, at the expense of accuracy.

jackieblack wrote: »

If the headline had been Travellers may face disruption or Travellers face possible disruption, then I would agree. But stating something as fact when it is only a possibility is sensationalism.

sensationalism
sɛnˈseɪʃ(ə)n(ə)lɪz(ə)m/
noun
1.
(especially in journalism) the presentation of stories in a way that is intended to provoke public interest or excitement, at the expense of accuracy.

A few months ago the papers were full of headlines like "Travellers Face Chaos as French Air Traffic Controllers Strike Again!" I saw no chaos. But the headlines were useful to grab my attention and look for potential issues with my travel plans. I might not have noticed a headline saying "The occasional flight might be affected by possible air traffic strike".

The MSE headline is mild in comparison. Even includes an "if" and the article itself is full of "coulds" and "mays". Headlines are supposed to be attention grabbing, that's the point of them.

But if you don't like it, just stick your fingers in your ears and keep repeating "it's all Project Fear, it's all Project Fear...."

zagfles wrote: »

A few months ago the papers were full of headlines like "Travellers Face Chaos as French Air Traffic Controllers Strike Again!" I saw no chaos. But the headlines were useful to grab my attention and look for potential issues with my travel plans. I might not have noticed a headline saying "The occasional flight might be affected by possible air traffic strike".

The MSE headline is mild in comparison. Even includes an "if" and the article itself is full of "coulds" and "mays". Headlines are supposed to be attention grabbing, that's the point of them.

Headlines are supposed to be attention grabbing, yes, but they should also be accurate and honest.

If the headlines you saw about French Air Traffic Control had said "French Air Traffic Controllers strike again - disruption possible" it would have informed people who were travelling and prompted most independent thinking adults to check whether they might be affected equally as effectively as a more dramatic, but untrue/over exaggerated headline.

But I appear to be in the minority these days as I'm not one of those people who needs unnecessary drama in my life. I prefer facts. It's one of the reasons I don't buy newspapers.