Media commented on Chongqing bus falling into the river: avalanche, some snowflakes may be innocent.

category:Society click:700
 Media commented on Chongqing bus falling into the river: avalanche, some snowflakes may be innocent.

People began to discuss how to solve the conflict between drivers and passengers. Someone took the example of Hongkong bus as an example. In Hong Kong, traffic diversion information will be posted on the windows, and all distractions that distract drivers constitute an offence, including talking to drivers. This is indeed the blind spot of the bus road safety in the mainland.

Among the conflicting voices of the passengers, another voice is quite conspicuous: the other passengers who were killed are also responsible because they did not stop. This bus has become a microcosm of society. Is it true that, as they say, avalanche, every snowflake is not innocent? Does the thinking of bystander effect or apathetic spectator have its explanatory boundary?

Sunny Chongqing Wanzhou Changjiang second bridge. Picture @ Wanzhou mobile phone station

A quarrel, fifteen lives

Suppose you are also a member of the car.

On Sunday morning, October 28th, the weather is fine.

Everything on No. 22 bus is not different from the past. After getting on the bus, you take a window seat in the back row of the bus. Later, the bus will sail to the second bridge of the Yangtze River. You like to sit here and watch the scenery of the Yangtze River.

There are about a dozen people on the train, and you take out your cell phone and listen to the song with your eyes closed. There was a noise ahead. A 40 year old passenger was talking to the driver. She had gone to the station and wanted to get off the bus. The driver refused. The passenger completely ignored the drivers explanation, and the two men argued. Time, 10 points, 3 minutes, 32 seconds.

The music in the headphones is mixed with the noise in front. You can see the bus driving to the Second Yangtze River Bridge. The river outside the window is sparkling. KAK - You look up in surprise. The voice just came from the passenger. She started and hit the driver with her mobile phone. Time, 10 points, 8 minutes, 49 seconds.

Buzz, buzz, in just two seconds - buzz, bang, ah - the driver hit back, the bus turned left, the wheels skidded, the bus crashed into the railings, and then the ears were filled with screams of terror...

At 10:8:51 a.m. on October 28, the No. 22 bus in Wanzhou District of Chongqing crashed into the Yangtze River. As of November 2, rescue teams confirmed that 13 of the 15 people who lost their connection on the bus were killed and 2 were still missing.

5 minutes of quarrel, 2 seconds of struggle, 15 lives disappear in an instant.

On November 2, the video clips recorded by bus black boxes were released, so we can know exactly what happened at the last moment when the bus crashed into the river. When the video was frantically forwarded, a friend was at the high speed rail. Dont listen to the video, she wrote it in the circle of friends. Can you understand that feeling? People on the train turn on the video one after another, screaming at the end and crying at the children pound at you one after another...

Panic, despair, and the sense of near-death suffocation oppress our tympanic membranes. Five days later, when we saw these images, there was no echo of the tearing cry.

On October 28, the Yangtze River was flooded with the same wave light as before. On a sunny day, we were living an ordinary Sunday outside the bridge.

No avalanche is innocent when avalanche.

After the accident, the second bridge of the Yangtze River was temporarily curbed. Rescue work was carried out nervously, and people standing nearby heard the story. In addition to those who are on the scene, more people understand that the process of events is through the screen of one side of the palm.

Womens car skills are no good! Its the drivers fault! At the same time, people are pointing their lips at the driver of the car that collided with the bus - yes, she is a woman, and many people are emphasizing that she is a woman. On the second day, the driver of the car driver interviewed the media. He said his wife had been taken away by the police. He can understand the mood of netizens, but can not accept their accusations. His wife has six years of driving age and is better than himself in terms of technology.

Too angry. I feel that some media users are reporting in a random way, not knowing the truth of the matter.

The wind of public opinion is turning with the announcement of road video. After the black box video was released, the wind turned 180 turns: some people began to blame the passengers for making unreasonable noises; some people discussed the drivers improper emergency response; others pointed their spears at the other 13 passengers who died unfortunately - when the other passengers on the bus chose to remain silent, bystanders became victims the next second.

The visitor died. The accident was packaged into a cautionary fable of human nature.

What happens if we stop in time? Some media turned out the video of April 20th this year. On a bus bound for Changsha in Hunan, a male passenger was refused parking because he missed the stop. Passengers were annoyed that they had grabbed the steering wheel openly. At this time, another male passenger flew on his feet and kicked away the troubled passengers.

One of the gods should be popularized throughout the country.

There are still many people associated with the short film car forty-four. The female driver of bus 44 was insulted by the gangsters. No one stopped the passengers. Only one male passenger stepped forward and was stabbed by the gangsters. After being insulted, the woman driver was brought back by the gangster to continue driving, and the male passengers who were courageous and courageous rushed out of the car. The depressed male passenger took another car, and soon he saw a police car passing by. It turned out that the female driver drove No. 44 into the ditch and all the people on the bus were killed.

Car forty-four (2001) stills.

No snowflake is innocent when avalanche occurs. The phrase used to criticize spectators is repeatedly used. The bystander effect, people analyse, when the number of bystanders increases and the responsibility of rescue is dispersed, the possibility of people acting bravely will be reduced. There is a contradiction between morality and indifference.

But can the tragedy of the victims on the No. 22 bus in Wanzhou, Chongqing, be explained by indifferent bystanders? One of the representatives of this thinking is the bystander effect.

We do not know the true state of onlookers.

The bystander effect (also known as the responsibility diffusion effect) can be traced back to a murder that shocked the United States decades ago.

1964, New York, Manhattan. Kitty Ginovis came home from her run bar. On the way back to her apartment, she was attacked by a man with a knife. He was knives and shouted for help. Someone yelled at the man to let go of the girl, but no one really came out to stop it.

The escaping murderer returned and knocked the poor girl to the ground. The attack lasted 35 minutes. Until someone called the police. 2 minutes later, the police arrived at the scene and the girl died. A police investigation found that 38 people had witnessed the incident, and only one person had called the police.

Victim Kitty Ginovis, near the crime.

The indifference of human nature has aroused the interest of social psychologists. In 1968, the bystander effect was first confirmed in the experiments of psychologists Latani and Daly. In their experiments, when other bystanders were present, people were less likely to offer help to people who pretended to have epilepsy.

No spectator was present: 85% of the subjects were assisted by hand, and the average reaction time was less than 1 minutes.

There were spectators at the scene: 31% of the subjects were assisted by hands; the average reaction time was close to 3 minutes.

Later psychologists confirmed the existence of bystander effect in other experiments, and tried to explain it from the aspects of decentralization of responsibility, conformity and audience inhibition. In recent years, cognitive psychologists have also used magnetic resonance imaging to explore which areas of the brain drive the bystander effect.

In 2007, however, Kitty Ginovis, considered a classic case of bystander effect, revealed that the report was false - that the indifference charges against 38 bystanders were false. In an interview with a New York Times reporter who reported it that year, the police officer who handled it made up the figure of 38 casually. As a matter of fact, the murder was committed on a gray street corner, and not so many lighted rooms happened to see the murder. In addition, there were many falsities in the report. Kitty did not die but was seriously injured when the police arrived. The case was not that no one called the police station, but the police who answered the phone did not take it seriously.

In 2016, the New York Times admitted that Kitty Ginoviss report was untrue and exaggerated about the number of bystanders.

Although the Kitty Ginovis case has led to psychological research and promoted the birth of the 911 alarm hotline and the implementation of the Act of Righteousness, this classic case has lost its validation of the bystander effect. Because of false reports, we know nothing about the real situation of the so-called bystanders.

Chongqing Wanzhou bus crashed into the river is the same reason. We did not know how the other passengers on the bus were at the time of the incident. From the public information, we only know that in the dozens of seconds before falling into the river, no one stopped. Whether there is reprimand or persuasion is not known. When the quarrel escalated to fighting, the bus crashed into the river in two seconds, and the people on the bus had no time to stop it.

When there are spectators in news events, there are always people who think of accountability. However, the responsibility for attribution should be based on clarifying facts. The 13 victims on the No. 22 bus may think that it was just a verbal quarrel that would not cause serious consequences. When things changed, it was too late to stop.

It was supposed to be a warm Sunday.

At 23:28 on the evening of October 31, 2018, the Chongqing Wanzhou Yangtze River Bridge was struck by a river bus and was salvaged. On the night of late autumn, the river was illuminated by the lights, and the rescuers at the scene stood in mourning. After falling into the Yangtze River, the bus leaned forward at a 30 degree angle and laid on the underwater reef. The structure was complete, the glass was damaged and the upper part collapsed.

Pictures from micro-blog @ Wanzhou released

Looking at the online accusations of bystanders, I want to know what kind of people these passengers are in their lives. With the advance of accident investigation and the medias tracking reports, their image has gradually become clearer.

On October 28th, at 5 a.m. 1 minutes, ran ran away from home to work. Before the accident, he had safely run two trains. In an official survey, he wrote that he had dinner with his parents the night before the accident, did not drink, and returned to his room at about 21:00, in a normal mental state. The weather was clear, the road was smooth, no potholes and obstacles, and the line of sight was good.

At 9:35, Liu got on the train. She wanted to get off at a destination where she couldnt stop because of road maintenance diversions and didnt listen to the drivers reminder to get off one stop earlier. The official daily character interview said she was not attractive and impulsive.

At 9:38, retired teacher Zhou Da Guan got on the train. He came back from the Chrysanthemum Exhibition to go home for dinner. In the report of Daily Person, we can see that Zhou Daguans Wechat is called Reunion, because the word Guan is See you again. Zhou Daguans child, Zhou Xiaobo, is one of the rescue workers. His most frequent words are: Im fine.

Later on, there were grandmothers and mothers who took two three-year-old children out to play, and old people who were waiting for their children to pick up and prepare to take their own bus to bring their daughter-in-law a birthday surprise.

On the evening of October 29th, some citizens were waiting for the rescue results in Wanzhou, Chongqing. Beijing News reporter Peng Ziyang photo

For many people, what a warm Sunday this should be.

If it is a traffic accident caused by collision, maybe people will feel a little better inside. A meaningless quarrel, a persons petty evils, life behind every drop, unexpectedly buried a time bomb.

Some netizens accused other passengers of falling on the River bus: a group of numb bystanders.

The result of the Chongqing Wanzhou bus crash accident was announced. Liu Mou, a 48-year-old passenger, quarreled with the driver for crossing the station and smashed his mobile phone on the drivers head. The driver withstood and hit back with his right hand. Later, he hit the steering wheel sharply, causing the vehicle to run out of control and cross the central line. After colliding with the opposite car, he broke the guardrail of the bridge and crashed into the river. Just because one person has passed the station, more than a dozen people will never be able to reach the station again. The cost is so heavy that it is suffocating.