Does this headline seem fair to you? He’s a former ambulance driver, and his complaint is the new cycle lanes will prevent vehicles from moving out of the way of an ambulance. The headline presents this as him being concerned about damaging his car should he accidentally drive over one. It seems like a very clickbaity way to present the article if you ask me.

  • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nzOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That phrase does not appear in the article. Why are you using a quote that doesn’t exist?

    would prevent him pulling his sports car out of the way for emergency services vehicles in a timely fashion.

    This is the crux of the article, which both you and Dave seem unable to comprehend. It seems like a reasonable concern to me.

    • Dave@lemmy.nzM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is the crux of the article, which both you and Dave seem unable to comprehend. It seems like a reasonable concern to me.

      Because it’s clear that’s not actually an issue, on account of the massive median strip.

      That phrase does not appear in the article. Why are you using a quote that doesn’t exist?

      This isn’t an uncommon use of the tool - kind of a mocking TLDR I guess. In this case I can understand it’s not necessarily clear that it’s use it satirical. Edit: Turns out the quote was of the body text from this post

      • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nzOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The whole point of this post was to query whether RNZ represented his views fairly with the headline, as I felt they did him dirty.

        Somewhat disappointingly, most commenters seem to have missed that point.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nzOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        him being concerned about damaging his car should he accidentally drive over one.

        This does not appear in the article, which is heavily implied by the way he used it.

        He’s also used the quote in a way where it completely changes what was said, which isn’t cool either