Histrionic hyperbole

Some people really do themselves a disservice.

Obviously the media has an obsession with hyperbole, rhetoric, histrionics, exaggerations and outrageous comment, but what some don't realise is that it can actually work to devalue their comments.

For example the government recently published consultation on an 80 miles-per-hour speed limit on the motorway. Brake - the safety charity - were up in arms.

Read their statement. It uses ridiculous talk. Count the exaggerated emphases:
"Selfish"
"Bereaved"
"Horrendous pile-up"
"Carnage"

I particularly like the last one if only because of the pun.

But it gets better - in another quote the charity says that the proposal is "desperately inhumane". I have to say this is entirely disregarding the context of the story:

1. it is a proposal out for consultation. It is not a definite.
2. it is an increase from 70mph to 80mph. That is all. Just 10 miles an hour. Which is - according to the DfT's own figures - already broken by almost half of the motorway users already. And on sections of the road with the highest specifications of safety equipment in place.

Splattering the charity's press release with such ridiculous claims only serves to discredit the charity and undermine any reasonable, moderate objection. They are clearly taking things out of context, they're off their nut. They can't be trusted. Such an overreaction is not just unwarranted but practically perverse and therefore that opinion can instantly be dismissed as crack-pot. They are unstable radicals who will shake the dictionary to extract the most contetious words they can find for the sake of a soundbite which ends up sounding like the snappings of a rabid dog.

And it isn't just safety charities either. The proposal for HS2, the high-speed rail link between London-Birmingham-Manchester and between London-Birmingham-the East Midlands-Scotland went out to consultation and the Commons Transport Committee broadly backed the proposal, saying there was a good cause for the construction, but with a few minor caveats.

HIGH-SPEED RAIL LINK 'IN TATTERS' SAYS OPPOSITION.

Have they read the same story?

Apparently the "report has raised around the fatal flaws in HS2's business case". This isn't just putting words in the mouth of the committee that they never said, this isn't just propaganda and rhetoric, this is an actual falsity.

No, by all means have an opinion. In fact, DO have an opinion, hold your position, make it known. But coming out with such ridiculous statements and comments as that denegrates what may well have been a properly reasoned, moderate and sensible argument or opinion held by a majority (or at lease a substantial minority) into incoherent ramblings, deranged outbursts and unacceptable nonsense that is just plain embarrassing.

I know there is an obligation from the media to obtain both sides of the story, to challenge and seek contrasting opinions; but I can't quite work out whether the journalist has struggled to find anyone with a reasoned response; selected or edited the comment for maximum effect; or alternatively has their own private agenda where they seek to discredit one side of the argument as logically unthinkable lunacy.

Or at least that's my opinion on the matter.