dk1
Veteran Member
Not from what I have witnessed. Just dreadfully poor quality and akin to a phone filming a screen.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Is it a good idea to release forward facing CCTV footage of incidents?
- Thread starter Straus
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Just to get this straight , neither me or my friend are railway employees and neither of us were ones to record the video , my friend found it on a public discord server and sent it to me without any details Outlining that the video was internal railway material that should not be sent elsewhere , which was not said in the server they acquired it from either.
They're talking about the left/right strobe visible on the wall behind the buffers in the video. It's certainly not an effect from the poor re-recording.
I would expect hazard lights to be more even, as it appears to strobe left to right. It cannot be said whether it's hazards or a rolling shutter effect unless someone knows how the hazards look on this unit.
Stossgebet
Member
We have a new generation, that have grown up only knowing a constant 24 hour news broadcast. And an older generation now accustomed to non stop news.
That culture is probably what plays a role in making people feel they can release videos like this. Add in the constant 'content creation' we now live with. And for many people, this is just a normal part of their on line existence. People now struggle to draw the line between their professional existence and their personal/on line life.
That culture is probably what plays a role in making people feel they can release videos like this. Add in the constant 'content creation' we now live with. And for many people, this is just a normal part of their on line existence. People now struggle to draw the line between their professional existence and their personal/on line life.
And this is exactly why information like this should be on a need to know basis until it can be processed/verified appropriately, for the public to get the facts correctly without the need to jump to conclusions. Because this is what happens. In an age where information is instant, people who haven't got a clue about something make incorrect assumptions and then proudly spout off their rubbish as though its factually correct. People pick this up and go with it. This isn’t a problem unique to the railway granted, but a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
bramling
Veteran Member
How does this different from lots of different facets of life? If one has professional or expert knowledge of a particular subject then what appears on the news will always tend to be full of inaccuracies.
I’m not sure what’s “a little bit of knowledge” about some forward-facing CCTV going out, this is just showing what happened.
Making a song and dance about stuff leaking out just makes it seem like the industry has something to hide.
I’m not necessarily advocating that this sort of stuff should go straight into the public domain, but IMV some people are having a disproportionate moan when stuff leaks out - it isn’t the end of the world if it does.
Has it actually been proved that the video is genuine and not a CGI/AI generated fake? I only saw it once when it was originally posted and I got the distinct impression that something wasn't right with it - the progression along the track just looked wrong to me
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
The public already know. That tends to happen when a train crashes into the buffers at a major London terminal.
My view is that there should be more communication when these types of things happen, not less. Everybody knows that the thing has happened and if you don’t communicate then you just leave an information vacuum for people to fill with speculation. Of course they official communication shouldn’t be speculative, it should be factual. But there should be more communication.
Sticking a fence up and telling everyone to bugger off doesn’t make the thing go away, it just makes you look like you’re trying to cover it up.
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed. The railway really likes to keep quiet about these kind of things; in an age of social media and 24/7 news that's simply not a sensible attitude. It essentially relies on the public forgetting about an incident during the extremely long period between it happening and the investigation report being released.
I can understand that it's uncomfortable for the driver for what happened to be broadcast for all to see, but ultimately if it had happened at another time of day then there would have been hundreds of people who would have filmed it on their phone anyway. Just the same as how incidents on flights are much more public now with the likes of FlightRadar 24 and ATC communications being broadcast live.
If it had happened on the roads there would also be a high chance of pictures or videos (or dashcam) being shared everywhere. There's nothing inherently special about the rail industry that justifies additional secrecy or a lack of transparency.
zwk500
Veteran Member
There should be official communication, which follows a process and determines that the information is suitable to be released and that it is accompanied by a clear, accurate description of what is happening.
Not raw video ripped from confidential logs with anybody's thoughts and feelings about it. As others have said - if the logs can't be trusted to be used properly, then steps have to be taken to control access which slows down the response to and recovery from incidents.
Straus
Member
It's not about restricting information - it's about not sharing data from internal systems of any form without authority. In any company that likely amounts to gross misconduct.
Should we release logs with the very detailed description of where parts of a body are following a collision? What about the security vulnerabilities identified within a ROC?
No-one should be able to divulge information that doesn't belong to them, because they feel its appropriate through their own judgement.
I agree that it shouldn't be leaked, but at the same time I don't see why there is such secrecy about it in the first place. A simple statement outlining the obvious initial facts would go a long way. I don't see that the video shows anything particularly shocking or gory so it's perfectly fit to be in the public domain.
And now that it has been leaked there seems very little point in trying to prevent further publication because it's all over the internet.
Vexed
Member
Indeed, the cat is out of the box. I saw it within a minute of opening Instagram this morning - I didn't even try to look for it.
martin2345uk
Established Member
100% this…!
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Yep, it was suggested to me by the algorithm too!
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Sharing confidential information is a different issue. Although, given how far and how quickly the video seems to have disseminated, it can’t have been particularly confidential in the first place. If you stick something on a system which thousands of people can access, it’s going to get leaked.
But it is also a symptom of my wider point: a lack of communication creates a vacuum. As we all know, nature hates a vacuum and if there isn’t much in the way of official communication then the space just gets filled up with conjecture, speculation, and hearsay.
By now, they will already know if there was an issue with the train or an issue with the driver. Why not say so? Communication after the train crashes at Bedford and Lewes was good- prompt, clear, concise- and it largely shut down the speculation.
Straus
Member
FFV is absolutely confidential. If it was someone in my team they'd be shown the door.
Because it may, and I'd stress may, I have no idea with this is the case or not and its not my business to know, end up being used as evidence either in a disciplinary or even criminal process and as such it should not be in the public domain.
It will be used in the investigation into what happened but that doesn't need armchair experts expounding on it in public and almost certainly coming to incorrect conclusions.
norbitonflyer
Established Member
There was a lot of unverified and, as it turned out, completely inaccurate information about the Salisbury crash going out within minutes. Suggestions that one train had struck an object, derailed, and knocked out the signalling, causing another train to hit it
Indeed, this is what NR's own press release said............
Philip Haigh (@philatrail) on X
Salisbury collision: GWR 1708 Portsmouth-Bristol struck object, derailed as it approached Salisbury. Derailment knocked out signalling. SWR 1720 London-Honiton hit Bristol train. Reports of injuries. This from NR press statement.
Last edited:
If it's genuine it's obviously been leaked. There's no chance it would have been officially released that quickly.
This point is important - it's not just whether something "should" be kept confidential, but it's also the ability of people to obey the rules that go with their jobs, and what that can do to trust and team work.
Having seen the video, what worries me is not what it shows but the fact that someone felt that they should download and share it. That's fundamentally the same, albeit at a less acutely serious level, as the police and NHS workers who've accessed records about high profile cases that were nothing to do with them
Exactly. And in every company the rule will be that the employer decides what goes into the public domain, and how, after carefully assessing what the ramifications of that are. It’s why there are well paid public affairs managers in big organisation and why employees who leak internal material often become ex-employees.
fishwomp
Established Member
The video should not have been shared.
There should be a riot act being read, if not a P45 written - this is confidential employer data.
It's negligent if the employer is not controlling access to CCTV - Data protection issues writ large.
CCTV is everywhere: people get up to all sorts, or just do daft things, in the passenger compartment or on the streets - they should not subsequently find themselves on a 'best of' clip on YouTube.
Similarly, plenty of railway employees are fully watched during their shift. Conductors - via in coach CCTV, platform staff - platform cameras, booking office - security camera, body-worn cams.
For both the good of employees and passengers, this needs to be kept safe, and anyone viewing it must know the consequences of illegal sharing.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 18,900
There really ought to be a disciplinary process following from this - in any other business there would be, and it can't be that hard to find who leaked the video. On top of that, I'd suggest this is a situation where no-one should know the outcome of a disciplinary (P45, you would think), but everyone needs to know that such actions have consequences.
I've seen the video, and there is definitely a confidentiality issue. Data protection is less clear cut as an issue - I'm struggling to see where this displays personal data.
fishwomp
Established Member
Snow1964
Established Member
This evening, over 24 hours later, RAIB hasn't even made such a statement (or at least nothing on its website) saying it is even aware of the incident. Really it should have standard form of words that it can put up saying what process is.
It happened at the busiest station in UK, really ought to expect someone to notice, and perhaps upload something, trying to hide it under the carpet and keep quiet was a daft idea.
Totally agree, leaking the railway's own video was unacceptable
Agree totally, there is absolutely no Press and PR team managing this, whilst the internet allows people to jump to conclusions
As London Overground had previously had a buffer stop collision (at Enfield ?) which eventually came out that a druggie (or more strictly someone under influence of substance) was driving it, would have thought they would have learnt that minimising the PR damage, (not playing let's keep quiet) would be sensible, especially as they had initially mentioned a medical episode, which turned out not to really be true on that occasion.