On May 12, 8:49*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Mr Thant" wrote in message

...

On 12 May, 18:49, MIG wrote:
According to the London ****e, there will be Oysters on Overground by
next May.

Evening Standard/London Lite article:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-details/Boris...

Yet again a London paper uses the term 'overground' confusingly, as the
'Overground' has been Oyster enabled since November. They also refer to the
'overland network' - another new term.


I am sure that the papers (and everyone) were using the term
"overground" long before TfL started using it confusingly.

But it was amusing that those papers today used the word which now
refers to precisely the part of the railway network that already
accepts Pay As You Go. You'd think that for a story like this they'd
choose their words more carefully (no you wouldn't).

The original press release very carefully doesn't actually make any
claims, but makes the announcements in a way that leads readers to
make inferences.

The papers that have been Boris's campaign leaflets till recently have
obligingly spelled out the inferences as facts (ie they have lied).
But they've also published a couple of comments on the story from
readers pointing out how old the plans are.

All very strange. Is it convincing anybody or is it making everyone
look silly? What might be preventing TfL spokespeople from explaining
the true situation about the current state and history of negotiations
with the various TOCs? Because I would be interested to know.