Yes, it is hard to believe, but I have pet peeves. This article kills two of my pets with one stone...
I found a reference to this article (GPS Causing Truckers to Crash into Bridges) this morning. The title made me curious, becase it made no sense. How can radios tuned to satellite signals cause truckers to crash into bridges? So I read the story. Yep, the headline is inaccurate, if not downright slanderous. It insinnuates that GPS is at fault.
A more accurate description is that some truckers are following the recommendations of some certain software that uses GPS and a streets database to help route travellers to a desired destination and, as a result, are taking routes that are not meant for truckers. Then the truckers end up hitting the bottom of bridges that do not have clearance for their trucks. So the line of effect is trucker -> GPS-consuming-software -> GPS. The trucker is at fault here. The headline has it backwards, blaming GPS for the mishaps of truckers.
Why do I care? Why am I jumping to the side of GPS? Do I have some need to defend the GPS system? No!!! I don't care about that part. It is the media that has me riled up. The media has power to influence people's opinions. And when the media is being manipulative, someone needs to call them out.
Ok, in this case, I don't think the media (specifically, in this case, Fox News) is purposefully being manipulative with this headline / article. Well, actually maybe. The headline is meant to get you to read the article. This headline borders on the sensational. It manipulated me into reading the article, only to find that the headline is not true. So I'm crying foul.
On to my next pet peeve: knee-jerk politics and resultant bad laws.
The article states that Governor David Paterson of New York wants a new law that punishes truckers for using mapping software that is not meant specifically for truckers. Now, I admit that truckers who rely on software meant for automobiles are taking risks. But the result of the risk-gone-bad is that the trucker is illegally travelling on a restricted road. And that law already exists. Why is there a need for an additional law?
To me it is a bad law because it is meant to charge the offender twice for the same crime. They already broke the law when they were on the restricted road. They already broke the law when they crashed into the bridge. Now the governor wants to charge the offender for taking bad advice. Oh, and I'm not blaming the software for giving bad advice. The advice being given by the software is perfectly fine for certain audiences. But the act of taking bad advice should not be the crime. The crime occurs when the existing laws are broken.
The article says:
"The bill would increase penalties for illegally using parkways and require all large commercial trucks to use GPS devices that route them away from restricted roads. It would also stick trucking companies or their insurance carriers with the bill for repairs and cleanup after bridge strikes."
I'm ok with the bill as described, except for the part that requires the use of certain GPS devices. The commercial truck industry should be smart enough to take their own steps to avoid travelling in restricted areas.
And that's my two pennies' worth.