Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
TALKING ON THE phone while driving is illegal in a growing number of countries – including Ireland – but with the explosion of in-car technologies the potential for drivers being distracted is greater than ever.
The dangers of gadget distraction were highlighted at the LA Auto Show in Los Angeles, when a whole day was devoted to the opportunities and risks presented by the so-called Connected Car.
Technologies which make driving safer – from anti-collision systems to devices which prod you awake if you drift off – are increasingly becoming standard on new cars.
But at the same time the modern motorist can choose from ever more sophisticated entertainment systems, while social networking and other hi-tech communications make talking or texting on the phone seem old hat.
“Driver distraction is number one for us,” Phil Abram, chief infotainment officer for General Motors (GM), told a panel debate on the first preview day of the show.
“It’s important to get that smartphone out of the hands, and safely in the centre console,” he added at the show, which opened its doors to the public on Friday and lasts through 1 December.
Increasingly powerful smartphones can be connected straight into in-car systems, which often have flat panel displays able to stream music, video and more at the touch of a button, or screen.
The Mercedes-Benz AMG Vision Gran Turismo concept vehicle is introduced at the Los Angeles Auto Show. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
German carmaker Audi presented what it called the “connected car of the future”, touting the new A3 sedan as the first to provide 4G LTE in the vehicle itself.
But a key problem for auto manufacturers stems from the sheer variety of phones, tablets and operating systems, which often fail to work seamlessly with the car itself, according to a study cited last week.
Frustrated motorists are left grappling with infotainment systems that freeze, Bluetooth phones or devices which do not talk to each other, or other glitches which require them to stab at buttons.
“The car manufacturers are really struggling with this,” Peter Skillman of Nokia’s Here mapping unit told the LA Times, which said electronics problems now outweigh mechanical issues as motorists’ top complaint in recent studies.
The sheer proliferation of devices also presents a problem for regulators. Whereas it was relatively easy to ban talking and texting while driving, it is difficult to draw the line with so many technologies.
“We’re not close to a standard on this,” said Kevin Vincent, chief counsel for America’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), adding that it is a long way from coming up with new laws.
“We’re making recommendations, but they’re voluntary. There are a lot of questions to be answered. It’s a very complex question,” he said.
People photograph the interior of the new Ford Edge concept vehicle. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
Mitch Bainwol, head of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, defended car makers, and put the blame squarely on phones and how they are used.
“The factor that’s causing death on the highways is the device,” he said, while acknowledging the tough task regulators face. “The pace of technology is faster than regulators can cope with.”
Ford vice president Jim Farley highlighted the importance of in-car technology in his opening keynote speech.
“We have literally turned the car into a platform for app developers, who work with us to add value through new features delivered at the speed consumers expect,” he said.
A new Nielsen study, the key findings of which were presented at the show, revealed that people are already shopping from their cars, with Amazon.com the fourth most browsed site.
“It’s early days to be sure, but you can see that some consumers are already turning the car into a shopping centre on wheels,” said an executive from the audience ratings service.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
They are going to start telling the truth?
Ah now… Be fair! This is the Daily Heil we’re talking about. They wouldn’t know the truth if it came up and slapped them on their “Outraged of Tunbridge Wells” arses.
The best possible change for that hate-filled, bile-spewing rag is to crawl back under the slimy rock it came out from, and to die there
Any chance they might stop printing this rag?
This rag only prints stuff to get a reaction…nothing more, they don’t care about the public interest or people’s well being. Don’t believe me…lets take one example from 2009 shall we…
In April 2009, blogger The Lay Scientist noted an interesting discrepancy in the policy of the Daily Mail. On the British edition, known for its scare stories on health, there was a demand to stop the compulsory administration of the HPV cervical cancer vaccine. This is fair enough as these people will go against any medical treatment given away for free.
However, on the Irish edition there was a campaign to “roll out the vaccine now!” demanding that the government issue it immediately – as in Ireland, it wasn’t going to be issued as freely as in Britain.
The Daily Mail and the Irish Daily Mail are owned by the same people and have the same (alleged) editorial stance – this wasn’t a case of The Guardian saying one thing and The Express saying another. This has led to people declaring that the Mail’s true position is “whatever the government is for, we’re against.”
source: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/18/bad-science-cancer-jabs-daily-mail
What the Hell is wrong with the people in the 10% market share . Why would u buy that tripe
It’s going to be savagely deleted from the annals of history?
Can one hope for too much?!?!
Your beloved Guardian is going broke. :)
I wouldnt wrap my fish and chips in the mail. But I winds up the hippies and diversity darlings no end.
Cant be that bad, so!
Loving this comment thread. It validates my hatred of this awful newspaper
Haters will hate but what do you know about the media and how it works?
If you’re looking to TheJournal.ie comment section for validation of your views, you’re doing something awfully wrong.
Good Point. I’ll get my coat
The “Irish” Daily Mail is so utterly offensive in every possible way. It’s tried it’s best to whip up outrage the way it does in the UK, but thankfully it hasn’t really worked.
I found it laughable that they were *attacking* Phil Hogan for saving his constituents from having to live with Travellers in the vicinity. The Fail is usually such a bastion of support for minorities!!
On that note its time for the Daily Mail Song
Knock them all you want but they’ve reported quite a few stories the other Irish papers wouldn’t touch.
Like ?
Mainly stories relating to the economic collapse and the people involved.
Here’s one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382368/I-shouted-stop-Finance-Department-mandarin-warned-crash-seven-times–ALL-ignored.html#ixzz1LDOFuNZg
They also did a good expose on Seanie Fitz and his lending to family members, including his college student daughter. I’m no particular fan of them, their agenda and the manner in which they report news but when actual Irish papers run scared of reporting news, we need an outside paper to do it. A good example is their story on Cowen asking the NTMA to invest in Anglo. That was the final nail in the coffin and brought about the early election. Because the IT and Indo didn’t have the balls to run that story, we could have been stuck with Cowen for longer.
Just because The Mail did “exposes” doesn’t mean that there was any truth to them whatsoever. Chances are these “exposes” were fabricated on a slow news day and peddled to their idiot readers as fact. The Daily Mail can piss off, and take that other virus The Sunday Independent with them.
Ruari, you can apply that to any news outlet. Regardless of you hating the Mail, the very fact that it’s not part of the establishment here, like the Indo and Times, is a good thing for the media in Ireland as like someone else commented, it means that the paper will take on stories that the other two wouldn’t touch.
Associated Newspapers may be British but painting both editions as one and the same is pure laziness. There are plenty of columnists in the Irish Mail who would be regularly critical of the British establishment (they even employ Joe Higgins for feck sake!) and most of the reporters are Irish thereby ensuring most of the stories are Irish. Yes, it goes to extremes with its awful coverage of the British royals but all the others do it too.
Oh, I disagree… I wouldn’t think that the Indo are averse to making up a story or two to peddle their muck. But I agree with you about the Irish Times. They are way too reputable.
changing editors causes/cures cancer.
People who read thejournal hate the daily mail.
How utterly predictable.
I honestly can’t understand how anyone wouldn’t hate the Daily Mail… aside from the people who work for it, obviously!
Well, I don’t know either as I don’t buy it. ;)
However, if you start reading it online, you’ll find it strangely addictive…
You’d be surprised by some articles (and utterly unsurprised by others), like the one about “Was Monty’s finest hour just a pointless bloodbath? Historians claim El Alamein – which began 70 years ago today – sacrificed thousands for the sake of propaganda”
Not what one would expect from the Daily Mail…
People who set up twitter account’s just to comment on the journal support the daily mail, how surprising.
rag
The Daily Hate Mail was rabidly anti-Irish throughout the 20th century. You could have knocked me over with a feather when they opened an Irish edition. Surely the most racist and vitriolic paper in respect of the Irish ever to see print couldn’t get a foothold here, I thought? You’d have better chances selling signed photos of George W Bush in Bin Laden’s cave, I thought. But no. There’s clearly 10% of people with no understanding of recent, modern history whatsoever.
Or they just bought it for the free CDs.
The Irish editions are decent enough reads
good crossword, good sports and good for lighting the fire
There’s no real journalism in that paper, just regurgitations of comments and stories found online that they then “quote” as said to their reporters. It’s a joke!
” Whatever the government is for, they’re against” They just print stuff to create a reaction” etc etc. Sounds like a paper made for the majority of commentors on the Journal if you ask me. What’s the problem? :)
Ink never refused paper!…as they say…also today’s newspaper,tomorrow’s fish and chip wrapper..:-)..
have your say