Guidelines

Media reporting guidelines for road collisions

Ten points for publishers

Say what you know and don’t know

At all times be accurate, say what you know and, importantly, what you don’t know.

Often emergency services will release scant information and key details won’t emerge until an inquest or court case. If further details do emerge, do update stories with the facts.

Avoid the word ‘accident’

Avoid use of the word ‘accident’ until the facts of a collision are known.

Most collisions are predictable and before an enquiry or court case the full facts are unlikely to be known. It is particularly important to avoid the word when someone has been charged with driving offences. Using ‘crash’ or ‘collision’ instead leaves the question of who or what is to blame open, pending further details.

Separate the driver from their vehicle

If you’re talking about a driver, say a driver, not their vehicle.

This is particularly important when describing actions such as speeding, or leaving the scene of a crash. If little is known in the aftermath of a crash, initially describe human actors as e.g., ‘driver and cyclist in collision’ or ‘two drivers in collision’, before mentioning vehicles.

Where details of the crash are known, or one human actor is clearly particularly vulnerable (or slow-moving), such as pedestrians or children, publishers may find it more accurate to say one person ‘hit’ the other, e.g., ‘driver hit a child in a pushchair’, or ‘driver hit a man crossing the road’.

Consider the impact on relatives

Consider the impact on friends and relatives of publishing collision details.

People deal with grief differently, and publishers should check with families when publishing injury detail.

Publish photos with caution

Treat publication of photos with caution, including user generated footage or imagery.

Photos including number plates, or anything related to victims at the scene of a crash could cause distress to friends and relatives, particularly if they aren’t yet aware of the collision. Be wary of publishing footage that could have been taken from behind the wheel, that may be seen to endorse mobile phone use while driving.

Report delays with delicacy

Be mindful if reporting on traffic delays not to overshadow the greater harm, of loss of life or serious injury, which could trivialise road death.

Remember emergency response staff may close a road following a collision while trying to save a life.

Avoid negative generalisations

Journalists should consider whether language used negatively generalises a person or their behaviour as part of a ‘group’.

Research shows that if people see a road user, such as cyclists, as an outgroup, or less than human, they are more likely to act aggressively towards them on the roads. Violence on the roads lies on the same continuum as everyday, normalised discrimination tolerated by the public.

Be mindful that language insinuating there is a ‘war’ or ‘battle’ on the roads risks in itself inflaming tensions.

Contextualise risks

Coverage of perceived risks on the roads should be based in fact and in context.

Larger, faster vehicles have a greater potential to cause injury and death, while those on horseback, on foot and cycles are more likely to be seriously injured in a collision - figures that are reflected in road casualty figures.

Providing context, such as local or national collision trends is particularly powerful in helping readers understand the scale of a problem, and avoids portraying incidents as isolated, when this is often not the case.

High visibility clothing and helmets don’t guarantee users safety, and mention of these elements has a powerful impact on readers, encouraging them to apportion blame before the full facts are known.

Don’t normalise law-breaking

Avoid portraying law-breaking or highway code contravention as acceptable, or perpetrators as victims.

An example of this is stories of speed camera use somehow ‘targeting’ road users, or causing danger on the roads. Speed is a major contributory factor in road collisions, serious injury and death on the roads and media attention for targeted enforcement of speeding, distracted driving, and impaired driving can increase awareness of—and support for—those efforts, research shows. Covering outcomes of investigations or prosecutions allows the public to see justice in action.

Consult experts

Road safety professionals can help provide context, expertise, and advice on broader issues around road safety.

Journalists aren’t expected to be experts in all fields, and it is good practice if reporting on road collisions to maintain regular contact with those experts, who can provide context or viewpoints emergency services may not mention. See our list of journalist resources and contacts.

Summary

1. At all times be accurate, say what you know and, importantly, what you don’t know.
2. Avoid use of the word ‘accident’ until the facts of a collision are known.
3. If you’re talking about a driver, say a driver, not their vehicle.
4. Consider the impact on friends and relatives of publishing collision details.
5. Treat publication of photos with caution, including user generated footage or imagery.
6. Be mindful if reporting on traffic delays not to overshadow the greater harm, of loss of life or serious injury, which could trivialise road death.
7. Journalists should consider whether language used negatively generalises a person or their behaviour as part of a ‘group’.
8. Coverage of perceived risks on the roads should be based in fact and in context.
9. Avoid portraying law-breaking or highway code contravention as acceptable, or perpetrators as victims.
10. Road safety professionals can help provide context, expertise, and advice on broader issues around road safety.