"See it, say it, sorted"

[muddythefish]

Sorry I am fed up hearing this soundbite seemingly everywhere on the national railway network. Its everywhere on trains and at stations. I know its purpose is commendable, but its just the way I feel.

Agreed. Embarrassing and cringeworthy. Are people paid to think up this rubbish ?

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I'd honestly have to disagree with almost every word of that response. To unpack that a little: These annoying scare-mongering announcements are not benign. A place people are pretty much trapped in for periods of time in uncomfortable surroundings is a worse than average place to bombard them with announcements, not a better place. You believe that you know what affects peoples stress levels and mental health so much better than the rest of us that we are "remarkably ignorant". You are so angry about people disagreeing with you that you are condemning them as selfish.

Whilst takno may be overegging the pudding slightly here, he does raise an interesting issue as regards how the railways are perceived as an environment.

I'm sure most people on here are regular travellers, but supposing someone was using the UK rail network for the first time Would they feel safe, comfortable and reassured by the constant barrage of unnecessary scary and irrelevent information, both oral and visual? Would their "customer experience" make them recommend train travel to their friends or would they feel intimidated and unwelcome.

We often forget that most leisure travellers have a choice and, if their experience of the railways is an unhappy one, they probably won't use them again. As a metaphor - suppose you took your partner out for a meal in a nice restaurant and, every time you tried to make conversation, a loud voice barked over the speakers "MAKE SURE YOU SPY ON YOUR FELLOW DINERS! LOOK OUT FOR ANYONE WHO LOOKS A BIT SHIFTY, THEY MIGHT BE PLANNING TO BLOW YOU UP!". You obviously wouldn't go back to that restaurant again, would you?

On a slight tangent, a DfT report out earlier this week concluded that 90% of road signs were completely pointless and should be removed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-unnecessary-road-signs-face-taken-down.html

Perhaps the DfT's next project should be to scrap 90% of station announcements - starting with "see it say it sort it"?

 

[DarloRich]

I'm sure most people on here are regular travellers, but supposing someone was using the UK rail network for the first time Would they feel safe, comfortable and reassured by the constant barrage of unnecessary scary and irrelevent information, both oral and visual? Would their "customer experience" make them recommend train travel to their friends or would they feel intimidated and unwelcome.

Are you honestly suggesting that people hearing recorded announcements are intimidated and unwelcome? How, therefore, do these sensitive people manage with airport security? How do they manage at a concert/gig where bags are routinely searched or football where people are routinely searched? These are much more intrusive and disruptive security measures. Do the people you think are scared by recorded announcements simply not leave home and lock themselves in a cellar for safety?

We often forget that most leisure travellers have a choice and, if their experience of the railways is an unhappy one, they probably won't use them again. As a metaphor - suppose you took your partner out for a meal in a nice restaurant and, every time you tried to make conversation, a loud voice barked over the speakers "MAKE SURE YOU SPY ON YOUR FELLOW DINERS! LOOK OUT FOR ANYONE WHO LOOKS A BIT SHIFTY, THEY MIGHT BE PLANNING TO BLOW YOU UP!". You obviously wouldn't go back to that restaurant again, would you?

oh dear. That isnt even close to what happens on a train or station and you know this. The simple point is that you and other experts here don't like announcements of any sort. I wish you would be honest instead of dressing it up.

As I said previously the proof in this pudding will be an increased use of the anti terror hotline and communication routes like the BTP text service.

Agreed. Embarrassing and cringeworthy. Are people paid to think up this rubbish ?

Ok. Using your expertise can you think up something better? The threat this announcement seeks to combat is real. How do you propose to empower people to report their suspicions?

 

[muddythefish]

Ok. Using your expertise can you think up something better? The threat this announcement seeks to combat is real. How do you propose to empower people to report their suspicions?

Using my expertise I'd use plain English short and to the point without a silly and embarrassing catchprase.

Using your expertise what would you do ?

 

[DarloRich]

Using my expertise I'd use plain English short and to the point without a silly and embarrassing catchprase.

Please provide an example. However I think you miss the point of advertising.

Using your expertise what would you do ?[/QUOTE]

I would use a short memorable catchphrase designed to be used across a whole range of channels and products. The detail of your stance isnt important. People wont listen and wont absorb the information. What is important is that people understand what the suggestion is and how they can follow it. I am not suggesting this campaign has a superb catchphrase. However it is memorable, easily repeatable and lodges with people pointing them in the right direction.

 

[Bromley boy]

I'm sure most people on here are regular travellers, but supposing someone was using the UK rail network for the first time Would they feel safe, comfortable and reassured by the constant barrage of unnecessary scary and irrelevent information, both oral and visual? Would their "customer experience" make them recommend train travel to their friends or would they feel intimidated and unwelcome.

I’m very disappointed with this captain haddock, and I always was a Tintin fan. Have you been on the Loch Lomond again?

If anyone is so mentally frail that they’re frightened or intimidated by announcements asking them to report anything suspiscious, to keep a close eye on their property etc. I’d suggest they’re in no state to be travelling without some sort of chaperone.

 

[al78]

It is mainly London where these announcements are regularly repeated? I can't recall hearing the phrase locally to me, but can remember seeing a poster somewhere.

 

[Wombat]

Ok. Using your expertise can you think up something better? The threat this announcement seeks to combat is real. How do you propose to empower people to report their suspicions?

At some point last year I started hearing an announcement at Bank about being careful on the platforms. The reason I remember it is because it was narrated by a small child and, what's more, it was delivered in a way that managed to stay on the right side of "cute" without becoming "bleurgh".

So it can be done. The "See it, say it, whatever" announcements are just dull. If the message really needs to be repeated at its current rate, and if the message really is that important to our collective safety (I'm not convinced, but OK) then it's worth paying to get a bunch of different, interesting announcements with a proper theme created by a professional advertising agency. Jack Daniels manage to come up with a different poster on the tube every five minutes, and all they're doing is flogging whisky. Our ceaseless vigilance against terrorist atrocity is surely more important.

 

[londiscape]

Are you honestly suggesting that people hearing recorded announcements are intimidated and unwelcome? How, therefore, do these sensitive people manage with airport security? How do they manage at a concert/gig where bags are routinely searched or football where people are routinely searched? These are much more intrusive and disruptive security measures. Do the people you think are scared by recorded announcements simply not leave home and lock themselves in a cellar for safety?

I think you're missing a key point here. In all of your examples, security checking is done by another human being, who should be and usually is a professionally trained security operative. When I go to a bar, rugby match, gig or airport I expect to be searched, and well trained security staff will project the situation something along the lines of "sorry, we need to do this, you're not suspicious but would you mind awfully showing us inside your bag?" I can make eye contact with them, ascertain a certain level of trust man-to-man (or woman) and establish that we have a mutual interest in making the process as painless as possible.

By profession I'm a datacomms/ICT engineer so regularly carry work tools that could be used as offensive weapons, but so far have never been denied entry to bars while carrying my work bag - a few questions but once I explain what I do for a living I've never had a problem.

This is completely different to an impersonal, robotic-sounding voice over the PA telling us every 30 seconds implying that the environment we are in is unsafe, full of terrorists and we need to be so suspicious of fellow passengers in case they're going to blow us up.

Agreed with CaptainHaddock that this has the potential to discourage use of the railway if not familiar with it, and certainly doesn't give a good impression of our country for visiting tourists, and for commuters the daily repetition just causes tune-out.

* there are some security personnel who act like jumped up wannabe Stasi agents, but thankfully in my experience they're in a small minority.

 

[DarloRich]

Agreed with CaptainHaddock that this has the potential to discourage use of the railway if not familiar with it, and certainly doesn't give a good impression of our country for visiting tourists, and for commuters the daily repetition just causes tune-out.

You are, of course, welcome to hold that opinion but no, it really doesn't do that at all. My opinion is that such a suggestion is preposterous.

 

[muddythefish]

I would use a short memorable catchphrase designed to be used across a whole range of channels and products. The detail of your stance isnt important. People wont listen and wont absorb the information. What is important is that people understand what the suggestion is and how they can follow it. I am not suggesting this campaign has a superb catchphrase. However it is memorable, easily repeatable and lodges with people pointing them in the right direction.

The problem is when a catchphrase is so silly and so detached from its intended purpose that it becomes open to ridicule - rather like May's equally meaningless "strong and stable". I've seen people on trains shaking their heads or laughing when SISIS comes on, and I'm much the same. I find it embarrassing. With sky high fares and cramped, nasty rolling stock, it's just another reason not to travel on the railway.

 

[Bromley boy]

Agreed with CaptainHaddock that this has the potential to discourage use of the railway if not familiar with it,

Blistering barnacles! Discourage use of the railway? Good. Far too many passengers already and they’re invariably a pain in the bum.

I would use a short memorable catchphrase designed to be used across a whole range of channels and products.

A short memorable catchphrase like “see it, say it, sorted”?!

 

[muddythefish]

A short memorable catchphrase like “see it, say it, sorted”?!

That was Darlo Rich's sentence

 

[londiscape]

Blistering barnacles! Discourage use of the railway? Good. Far too many passengers already and they’re invariably a pain in the bum.!

I do apologise, I hadn't realised that the purpose of the railways was to minimise passenger loadings because we are "a pain in the bum". I will be sure to use my car* for future journeys as it's clear I'm not welcome on your trainset despite paying money for it.

I get that you were (hopefully) joking with your post, but can you try seeing it from a passengers POV?

* that being the car I don't have due to living in London

 

[43096]

A short memorable catchphrase like “see it, say it, sorted”?!

Which is easily mis-heard as “See it. Say it. Sort it.” which would encourage people to take things into their own hands.

The problem is that the whole thing is being totally over done. Just more verbal diarrhoea, something that the railway specialises in.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I’m very disappointed with this captain haddock, and I always was a Tintin fan. Have you been on the Loch Lomond again?

If anyone is so mentally frail that they’re frightened or intimidated by announcements asking them to report anything suspiscious, to keep a close eye on their property etc. I’d suggest they’re in no state to be travelling without some sort of chaperone.

I suspect you're deliberately misinterpreting my comments here; I'm not saying that unnecessary scaremongering security announcements are making people mentally ill, I'm saying that they encourage the belief that the railways are a hostile and unpleasant environment and serve no useful purpose, especially now the terrorist threat is diminishing.

If you travel by bus for example, you don't get a constant barrage of security announcements either on the bus or while you wait at the bus stop. So why is it necessary to have all this security nonsense barked out every few minutes on the rail network?

 

[DarloRich]

serve no useful purpose, especially now the terrorist threat is diminishing.

I would be interested to understand on what you base that statement.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I would be interested to understand on what you base that statement.

I posted the link earlier in the thread but here it is again.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43242726

 

[Bromley boy]

I posted the link earlier in the thread but here it is again.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43242726

But that only relates to the terror threat from Northern Ireland.

 

[fowler9]

Using my expertise I'd use plain English short and to the point without a silly and embarrassing catchprase.

Using your expertise what would you do ?

What I am about to say is completely irrelevant so apologies but this brought to mind a roadside warning I saw in New Zealand that I loved. "Warning, 1080 poison. If you drink the water you are a bloody idiot".

 

[CaptainHaddock]

But that only relates to the terror threat from Northern Ireland.

Maybe, but the international terror threat is also diminishing, as other countries are also lowering their threat level.

https://www.politico.eu/article/belgium-lowers-terror-threat-level-two-years-after-brussels-attacks/

As Arctic Troll said earlier in this thread, “Of course MI5 and MI6 have a vested interest in bigging up the terrorist threat. They don't get funding and- even more importantly- they don't get a free hand away from any sort of scrutiny if there isn't a big and huge terrorist threat ready to kill us all.”

It’s interesting however that once they’ve left the security services and can finally be honest, the message totally changes!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-proportion-former-mi6-chief-richard-dearlove

 

[Bromley boy]

Maybe, but the international terror threat is also diminishing, as other countries are also lowering their threat level.

You can't use an article referencing the specific threat from NI or the the fact that another country has chosen to reduce its threat level as evidence that the threat level is diminishing. Did the attacks last year escape your notice?

As Arctic Troll said earlier in this thread, “Of course MI5 and MI6 have a vested interest in bigging up the terrorist threat. They don't get funding and- even more importantly- they don't get a free hand away from any sort of scrutiny if there isn't a big and huge terrorist threat ready to kill us all.”

Where is the evidence to back up that statement? It sounds like tin foil hat stuff from someone who has some kind of chip on his shoulder about the security services.

It's a bit like someone saying "global warming is just a big conspiracy to keep climate change scientists employed".

It’s interesting however that once they’ve left the security services and can finally be honest, the message totally changes!

You do realise that article is three years old? It seems he spoke too soon!

Do you think the families of the victims of the Manchester Arena bombing or the London Bridge attack would agree with that article, given what has happened since?

 

[DarloRich]

It’s interesting however that once they’ve left the security services and can finally be honest, the message totally changes!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-proportion-former-mi6-chief-richard-dearlove

But that is a nearly 4 year old report! I think that this section has been proved to be wrong:

"there had been a fundamental change in the nature of Islamist extremism since the Arab spring. It had created a major political problem in the Middle East but the west, including Britain, was only "marginally affected".

Unlike the threat posed by al-Qaida before and in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks 13 years ago, the west was not the main target of the radical fundamentalism that created Isis, (the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant)"

The previous report you linked related to terrorism emanating from Northern Ireland which i agree is low but not zero.

The Belgian report is interesting. It makes reference to soldiers patrolling the streets ( I assume as a common event). We haven't had that on the mainland here except in the most limited circumstances. Perhaps Belgium feel they have broken up any conspiracies facing their country and imprisoned or killed all of the participants. The report also says that "level two would not be treated in the same way as it was before the attacks, because the country has heightened certain security measures in recent years". Perhaps Belgium have simply relaxed their terror threat level to one similar to ours. In any event the decisions made in Belgium, based upon their own intelligence, can not influence decisions made in the UK

 

[Deety]

Reducing to the absurd seeing as Manchester and London Bridge have come up, why do we not mount loudspeakers on every lamppost to tell us to report anything dodgy every 30 minutes? It's not a railway-specific problem.

 

[muddythefish]

What I am about to say is completely irrelevant so apologies but this brought to mind a roadside warning I saw in New Zealand that I loved. "Warning, 1080 poison. If you drink the water you are a bloody idiot".

Hahaha. Very good. The SISIS message was played every 15 minutes on the train today. They win. I'll go by road in future.

 

[fowler9]

Hahaha. Very good. The SISIS message was played every 15 minutes on the train today. They win. I'll go by road in future.

Ha ha. It's a weird one in New Zealand. There are 1080 poison warnings everywhere.

 

[Raul_Duke]

Even as we speak an alarm is sounding in GCHQ.

Theresa May calls a COBRA meeting with the heads of all the security services.

“Gentlemen you are all fired, we’ve searched high and low, and whilst you have training, experience and access to classified information, you have no idea the chaos your simple recorded message has caused with people who get visibly aroused at the idea of a train being painted a slightly different colour.

From now on national security will be entrusted to some weird virgins on a trainspotting website. We’ve read all their postings and they definitely feel they know more than you. Clear your offices immediately.”

 

[jon0844]

I don't get how people are only linking this to terrorism. The message also allows people to report anything they don't think is right, and the text shortcut has been promoted as something to report things like anti-social behaviour.

Graffiti attacks on trains are up, and smoking weed on trains. These are other examples of where telling staff or BTP would be beneficial. Last month a woman claimed she was sexually assaulted on a GN train. The police are asking for witnesses, but wouldn't it be good if people learn the number and perhaps contact the police at the time?

I bet a lot more people would report if they could do so quickly and easily, like a text, as against having to phone 101 and waiting to speak to someone. A text can also be sent in an instant whereas you need to set aside time to call the police, and so I doubt someone would phone up when ON the train there and then. It can hardly be done discreetly if you're near the people you're reporting!

 

[edwin_m]

I bet a lot more people would report if they could do so quickly and easily, like a text, as against having to phone 101 and waiting to speak to someone. A text can also be sent in an instant whereas you need to set aside time to call the police, and so I doubt someone would phone up when ON the train there and then. It can hardly be done discreetly if you're near the people you're reporting!

You can. The standard message goes "...text British Transport Police on 61016. Remember the three Ss: see it..."

Possibly you've tuned out from this message?

 

[DarloRich]

Hahaha. Very good. The SISIS message was played every 15 minutes on the train today. They win. I'll go by road in future.

Honestly? You will honestly travel by car rather than by train because of an annoucement? Really? You best not turn the radio on in your car. I must have heard the same adverts every 15 minutes on commercial stations. You best stuff your ears with cotton wool just in case!

Even as we speak an alarm is sounding in GCHQ.

Theresa May calls a COBRA meeting with the heads of all the security services.

“Gentlemen you are all fired, we’ve searched high and low, and whilst you have training, experience and access to classified information, you have no idea the chaos your simple recorded message has caused with people who get visibly aroused at the idea of a train being painted a slightly different colour.

From now on national security will be entrusted to some weird virgins on a trainspotting website. We’ve read all their postings and they definitely feel they know more than you. Clear your offices immediately.”

Is the winning thread.