Legal Research

Walking While [X]?ing May Be Dangerous?

By David Cheifetz

Curmudgeon time.

An article with the headline captions:

Driven to Distraction
Forget Gum. Walking and Using Phone Is Risky.

appears in today’s online and print New York Times.

The note at the bottom of the online article is:  “ A version of this article appeared in print on January 17, 2010, on page A1 of the New York edition.”

The point of the piece is that walking while distracted by reading or using the keyboard or touchscreen may be distracting.

As Homer  (Simpson, that is: the other is currently unavailable for comment, at least to me)  might say: “D’oh”!

Would the article have appeared if the 2nd caption was “Forget Gum. Walking and Reading Is Risky.”?

Read the article and substitute anything meaning doing anything else other than paying attention while walking. Then ask yourself: would the article have appeared on p. A1 of the print version of the NY edition of the NYT unless the person did something really stupid?

Like, say, realizing he or she hasn’t yet submitted the article he or she was supposed to write for the technology page, the deadline is 30 minute away,  writing it on his or her portable whatever while walking on a sidewalk somewhere, and distractedly slipping on and into a pile of horse poop?

Unfortunately, we’re not told that that happened to the writer.  Pity.

This being a site that’s about “things legal”,  I now insert the required LC*:  What’s next – warning labels on cellphones, pda’s and the like in order to minimize the risk of class actions?

I’m kidding, of course. I am, right?

* Legal Content, of course.

Full post as published by Slaw.ca on January 16, 2010 (boomark / email).