Take a look at this pic pls.. pic.twitter.com/VALwWvziI5
— Harsha BM (@Harshagautam) December 12, 2018
On Thursday, December 13, Bengaluru was choc-a-block with vehicles and many were taken aback at the unusual traffic overflow on the roads. Later, on WhatsApp a message started making rounds that Bengaluru’s Namma Metro Pillar 155 at Trinity circle was damaged and the Metro services had been stopped on this stretch. It said:”Metro pillar in MG road got twisted, better avoid the road and metro through that route.”
Another message, among the first and passed on at 7:16 pm on Wednesday said: “Looks like the support bearing on top of the pillar has given way. Avoid that route.”
Soon Twitter was buzzing with similar tweets.
There is a crack in #Bengaluru #Metro pillar already. This is in MG Road (Trinity Metro Station). Thankfully they are trying to repair it before a mishap. However, cracks within 7yrs of operation. 😑 #nammametro #BMRCL pic.twitter.com/rihyoFY52I
— Sounava Ghosh (@sounava) December 12, 2018
What has happened?
The real problem was explained as “Honeycomb formation” by experts that happens at the time of “concreting due to poor compaction create porosity in concrete. Structure life reduces with the exposure of steel corrosion due to honeycomb.”
Soon, BMRCL issued a clarification that there is no such thing as twisted pillar. “In whatsapp group the following message is being circulated. “Metro pillar in MG road got twisted, better avoid the road and metro through that route” — The message is misleading & wrong. It is clarified there is no twisting of any pillars,” said BMRCL.
In what’s app group the following message was being circulated
“Metro pillar in MG road got twisted, better avoid the road and metro through that route”
The message is misleading & wrong. It is clarified there is no twisting of any pillars .
— BMRCL (@cpronammametro) December 12, 2018
Conclusion: A misleading claim that has been shared widely on social media owing to its impact on daily commuters of Namma Bengaluru metro trains. Our rating of this claim is ??? (Misrepresentation)