Padded lampposts in London not really being tested

We had a sneaking suspicion that the world hadn't really come to strapping pads around lampposts in order to keep walking texters safe, and sure enough, the whole shebang was more of a stunt and less of a bona fide trial. Reportedly, only a few pads were put in place and photographed for around 36 hours -- afterwards, the PR firm responsible for putting them up simply took them back down. It seems as if the scheme was meant to "test out [the idea] and gauge people's opinions," according to a 118 118 spokesman, and safe to say it certainly accomplished that.

[Via textually]

[Dale @ Mar 17th 2008 1:39PM]

118 aren't a PR firm, they're a directory service (like Yellow pages)

[sockatume @ Mar 17th 2008 1:57PM]

Yes, and about 3 seconds of Googling would've revealed this. Considering that not bothering to check the story before reporting it was responsible for turning news sources into a free advertisement for 118 118, I find it particularly ironic in this instance.

[Cal @ Mar 17th 2008 2:16PM]

Even if they didn't know 118 118 was an extortionately priced directory service, you'd think they'd actually read the article...

"put in place by a PR firm working ***for*** directory company 118188"

[packetsniffer @ Mar 17th 2008 2:34PM]

Not to mention the fact that Engadget claims to have had a sneaking suspicion that the story wasn't true, when their original article says nothing of the sort:

http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/03/06/padded-lampposts-for-distracted-texters-being-tested-in-london/

Of course we'll all now be banned from commenting ;-)

[chezzo @ Mar 17th 2008 2:51PM]

For the education of foreigners:

(to the tune of the A-team)
118! 118! 118! 118! etc. etc.

[Richard Lai @ Mar 17th 2008 3:23PM]

Time for some video education I think:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slh03uk88Ko
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDnVhu_mxvE

Great parodies. :D

[chezzo @ Mar 17th 2008 3:33PM]

Ha, never seen them! I obviously don't watch enough TV... (or just too much BBC)

Beats James Nesbitt's rubbish Yellow Pages ads hands down!

[saq @ Mar 17th 2008 1:42PM]

It seems like running into some kind of giant metal pole while textwalking would be the exact kind of thing that teaches you to watch where your going, thus negating the need for padded poles. Does that make sense to anyone else or is it just me.

[Pip @ Mar 17th 2008 3:23PM]

That would be like spanking your children when they misbehave. That'll end with you behind bars. So with this in mind, walking into an un-padded pole would mean the city is at fault and you can sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue.

[Cal @ Mar 17th 2008 3:42PM]

This guy could get two suits out of it - one against the council and one against his barber for that haircut...

[Ignatius @ Mar 17th 2008 1:50PM]

I hate people who textdrive. I hope they drive right into metal poles and bash their face against their stupid phone and steering wheel.

[Ladderless @ Mar 17th 2008 1:51PM]

Someone forgot to take his medication today...

[Ignatius @ Mar 17th 2008 1:56PM]

Obviously you've never been stuck behind some douche that holds up traffic for ten minutes while he texts his girlfriend.

[Andrew @ Mar 17th 2008 2:08PM]

This post is coming from my Blackberry while driving 75mph down I-294. Cheers!

[Anthony @ Mar 17th 2008 2:25PM]

Unfortunately they often don't just hit their *own* heads while drivetexting. Generally there's another car or pedestrian or cyclist involved.

[Krono6 @ Mar 17th 2008 8:18PM]

And that's a rather big problem in London.
There are too many deaths caused on the road right by my house. Only recently they bothered putting up traffic lights.

[Darkest Daze @ Mar 17th 2008 10:15PM]

Well they've made it illegal for me to talk on my phone while driving, so now I'll just have to use both hands and look down at the same time to text people back instead of calling them.

[Flashpoint @ Mar 17th 2008 1:57PM]

idiots

[silverblackvoid @ Mar 17th 2008 2:04PM]

is this news?

[Don Giovanni @ Mar 17th 2008 2:48PM]

better yet, how is it tech related?

[Anthony @ Mar 17th 2008 2:26PM]

No. Check out: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ for news.

[thethirdmoose @ Mar 17th 2008 3:20PM]

Or check out foxnews.com!!!
wait...

[Charles R Hamilton @ Mar 17th 2008 2:13PM]

So another post that that wasn't true. Not that any thinking person thought it was. It is disturbing how many posts on the major tech blogs are simply bullshit. Its almost like reading the New York Times.

[trumpton @ Mar 17th 2008 2:16PM]

To run this ridiculous, clearly made-up non-story once is a bit careless, To run it twice suggests that maybe there's a bit of PR cash to be had by someone at Engadget.

[Digg @ Mar 17th 2008 2:20PM]

Dugg
http://digg.com/tech_news/Padded_lampposts_in_London_not_really_being_tested

[jperry @ Mar 17th 2008 6:04PM]

Seriously, how has this person not been banned yet. A glance at his recent posts shows that this is all he ever does...

[deadpool @ Mar 18th 2008 12:07AM]

i'm not doug

[Stiv @ Mar 17th 2008 2:22PM]

I, for one, welcome... er I mean I'm glad to see that our British friends have not slipped to a level that such pads are seen as necessary. Now, if only some good English distributor would convince an American company to begin importing Jaffa Cakes so I don't have to buy them for $7.99 a box from specialty stores I'd be happy.
Rule Britannia!

[Imran @ Mar 17th 2008 4:38PM]

Wow! You have to get jaffa cakes from speciality stores? That's weird. But then we only get Mountain Dew and those american chocs from special stores too. I see a business opp here :D

[Ally @ Mar 17th 2008 2:23PM]

I think the same people that NEED padded poles, are probably the same people who need padded cells :P

[Matt B @ Mar 17th 2008 2:45PM]

If you don't watch where you are going, you deserve everything you get.

[MikeG @ Mar 18th 2008 12:05PM]

Even poo on your shoe? I can't be looking ahead of me AND at the floor at the same time.

[Don Giovanni @ Mar 17th 2008 2:51PM]

I guess in London there are alot of people getting killed by vehices? I mean, if you can walk into a lamp post i dont see why a bus shouldn't sweep your ass off the sidewalk..

[ssuk @ Mar 17th 2008 3:04PM]

How is this technology... Or for that matter... News? It's a glorified advertisement. Sure hope Engadget is getting some of the money from that advert, else they and we alike are being boned here.

Hell, I'd have rabid Apple and Anti-Microsoft posts over this shit.

[Jeff @ Mar 17th 2008 3:16PM]

I love it when companies figure out new ways to get free advertising from the press, and the press just go right along with it.

[TomR @ Mar 17th 2008 4:11PM]

You think maybe that the original story said that "if all goes well, there are plans to roll out the idiot-proof system in...Stupidton." would have tipped someone off.

'cmon, did anyone really think this was serious?

(Back when I lived in China, once in a while the press there would accidentally take an Onion story and run it as real news...)

[Imran @ Mar 17th 2008 4:40PM]

Haha I remember the 1st Onion article I read, about how death is the reason we have such a high mortality rate.

[Fubar @ Mar 17th 2008 6:33PM]

Maybe he saw "Stupidton" and thought it was Surbiton.

Maybe he was distracted by what appear to be the love children of Borat and Cheech & Chong.

Maybe I'm trying to rationalize the research standards of the blog I spend so much time on....

[matt byrne @ Mar 17th 2008 7:15PM]

I work for 118. We don't have an outside PR firm, we have 118 Media. It's been mental today; free t-shirt, A Curly Wurly, generally happy atmosphere. Beats your typical Monday shift.