Associated Press Cautions Journalists That Crashes Aren’t Always “Accidents”

The Associated Press has tweaked its guidance for journalists about when to call traffic collisions “accidents.”

Street safety advocates, spearheaded by New York City’s Transportation Alternatives, have been pushing police and media organizations to drop the term “accident” because it implies the absence of culpability — often before all the facts are in — and makes traffic collisions seem like random, unpreventable acts of God.

The AP style guide, a highly influential reference book for reporters, currently doesn’t take a stance on whether “accident” is appropriate. A web addendum to the guide does recommend against “accident” because it’s not a neutral term, but the guide itself refers to collisions as “accidents” multiple times.

The new style guide will be released June 1 and cautions against calling a crash an “accident” in cases “when negligence is claimed or proven.” The AP tweeted today that “crash, collision or other terms” should be used instead.

“This is a big win for the national Vision Zero movement to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries, because media outlets like the Associated Press have the power to change not only the conversation about safety, but also the culture on our streets,” Transportation Alternatives’ Executive Director, Paul Steely White, said in a press release.

The strange thing about the revised guidance is that “accident” is still the default term, instead of a term reserved for cases in which the absence of fault has been ascertained.

Under the AP’s guidance, journalists reporting breaking news about collisions would continue to use the loaded term “accident” before an investigation has determined whether negligence or recklessness was a factor.

But hey, the AP isn’t known for rapid adaptation. It’s just getting around to blessing a lowercase “I” when spelling the word “internet.”

  • HamTech87

    “Under the AP’s guidance, journalists reporting breaking news about collisions would continue to use the loaded term “accident” before an investigation has determined whether negligence or recklessness was a factor.”

    Sadly, very few journalists ever get around to following up on the initial crash article. So the term “accident” will never get changed.

  • Ed Beighe

    True but it makes some use of the offensive term clearly against their guidelines, here’s a quote from an AP story a few months ago:
    “A teenager has turned himself in to face manslaughter charges stemming from a car accident that killed two people”.
    http://azbikelaw.org/police-speeding-driver-kills-2-on-n-phx-residential-street/

  • Jeff Larson

    It clarifies the difference between a crash or collision and “accident”. Until now most reporters saw no difference and used them interchangeably. Now reporters will know that “accident” is inappropriate for DUI, aggressive, distracted and other negligent/criminal crashes. Since most crashes involve negligence “accident” should not be the default term. The transition will still take time. It still requires vigilance, calling on reporters who use the word incorrectly.

  • 94110

    I for one still call it the Internet. It’s a proper noun. My recommeneded usages:

    1. The Internet accidented.
    2. I accidented the Internet.
    3. There was an Internet accident.
    4. That guy crashed into someone because he was on the Internet while driving.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Traffic Death Experts Ignore the Role of Dangerous Streets

|
When it comes to preventing traffic fatalities, are the country’s leading authorities missing the point? Scientists at the Center for Disease Control told the New York Times last week that the key to preventing traffic deaths is strong seat belt laws, speeding enforcement, car seat promotion, drunk driving prevention and restrictions for teenage drivers. Traffic […]

What Should Doctors Do to Prevent Traffic Deaths?

|
When cars first became a common presence in American cities, doctors were shocked by the carnage. In 1925, editors of the New England Journal of Medicine called the bloodshed caused by motorists “appalling” and lamented children’s loss of life as “a massacre of the innocent.” The sense of urgency was still detectable a few decades later. […]