Bill Kroske, vice president of American Traffic Solutions, Inc., has been suspended after misrepresenting himself on two newspaper websites in western Washington. Kroske claimed to be a citizen in comments he made on both the Everett, Wash. Herald and the Spokane, Wash. Spokesman-Review.

In those comments, Kroske promoted American Traffic Solutions' red light camera systems, which bust impatient travelers even when cops aren't available. A reporter at the Herald found Kroske out after tracing comments he made back to Scottsdale, Arizona, where the company is based. That wasn't the only clue, however.

It seems that Kroske used his work email address and real name to set up commenting accounts on both websites. He then proceeded to extol the benefits of red light camera systems on both newspapers' sites. Evidently Kroske was ignorant of the fact that comments are moderated, and administrators can track their origins. For all the gory details on Koske's online bumbling, head over to the Spokesman-Review's website.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 24 Comments
      RJC
      • 3 Years Ago
      Who needs high priced lobbyists and lawyers when you can just spin it yourself?
      Jason H
      • 3 Years Ago
      Awesome... I love it when people like this get their comeuppance.
      AmericanHenry88
      • 3 Years Ago
      But don't stop with Kroske. He was just one of ATS' spokesmen. There's at least one other, and he is potentially much more dangerous. He is Mark Rosenker, former chair of the NTSB. Having retired from the NTSB he now is Senior Advisor to an ATS-supported pro-camera group. Taking advantage of his ('til now) top notch credentials, Rosenker has been granted numerous pro-camera "guest columns" in newspapers around the country in which he mentioned his current position as Senior Advisor to the National Coalition for Safer Roads but never disclosed that the NCSR is supported by ATS. ATS is also behind "citizen supported" pro-camera websites you'll find in towns where the company is entrenched. The best article about the concocted sites is at bancams dot com. To find the article, put "stupid" in their search box.
      Hampton
      • 3 Years Ago
      ...suddenly the word 'idiot' comes to mind...LOL!
      Dawgz83948
      • 3 Years Ago
      Fortunately for him you have to be smooth to be an executive anymore. Intelligence plays no role in it so this man is exactly what I've come to expect from someone in upper management.
      kevsflanagan
      • 3 Years Ago
      I can't wait till MA attempts to pass a law allowing these to be used in our state. I'm going to print up and send copies to each and every rep articles like this to let them know how bad they actually are and what the company execs act like.
      LUSTSTANG S-197
      • 3 Years Ago
      That's good news. I have never been a fan of the idea of those red-light cameras, so hearing of a higher-up exec of the company that makes the things getting busted for anything puts a smile on my face.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        kevsflanagan
        • 3 Years Ago
        This is why.... "An executive at the company that provides red-light cameras in Spokane has been suspended after a newspaper in Western Washington discovered he misrepresented himself as a local resident on its website and made comments to promote business in the area, a company spokesman said Friday." Its not that he posted on a forum but the fact he presented himself as a local resident and not a company exec. Now if he presented himself as the company exec I'm sure it wouldnt be a issue.
        Jeff Is Mr Mom
        • 3 Years Ago
        The problem is that he didn't identify himself as an employed party with a direct financial interest in this product. For instance, the local utility company (Avista) has a dedicated PR guy who readily states who he is when he replies to critical stories and user comments; though I often feel his employment status clouds his objectivity, at least he's honest about his identity and why he's posting. Kroske, on the other hand, attempted to sway public opinion by misidentifying himself as a local citizen whose main concern was safety. I think it's fair to say that his real concern was trying to stop another community from rethinking their red light camera enforcement and contractual obligations. What's scary is that this guy is a VP and yet he didn't possess the wherewithal to open an anonymous Gmail or Yahoo Mail account. I'd think the most unreliable kid working your local McDonalds drive-thru would have figured that little "trick" out...
      Quest
      • 3 Years Ago
      That's sad... really, really pathetic!! These cams are nothing but revenue generators.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Quest
        [blocked]
          getoffmydinghy
          • 3 Years Ago
          Except for the fact that in the cities that have implemented these cameras, they have shortened the yellow light time AGAINST the recommendations of traffic engineers. http://blog.motorists.org/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-10458570-71.html Money first. Safety second. These red light cameras are about money grabs, plain and simple. If you really want to create safer roads, we need a better driver education system and better licensing system. Germany's autobahn system, with unlimited speed-sections, has less fatalities than the United States interstate system, with all the money we put towards state troopers and speed enforcement. When I got my driver's license in 2002, all I had to was parallel park, reverse in a straight line, make a 3 point turn, and come to a complete stop at every intersection. This was on a closed course, with no traffic behind the DMV. How does that prepare me for driving in the real world? My point is that while red light cameras purport to be about safety, they're really about money. If you want to tackle driver safety in this country, you need a better driver education and licensing system.
          Nick Balsbaugh
          • 3 Years Ago
          Look everybody, it's Bill Kroske AGAIN! He doesn't seem to learn.
          LUSTSTANG S-197
          • 3 Years Ago
          No, we do not need these cameras. They are far more intrusive than they are safe.
          • 3 Years Ago
          [blocked]
          Mike K
          • 3 Years Ago
          While accidents caused by blowing read lights may decrease at that intersection, the number of rear end accidents will increase 200-400%.
          graphikzking
          • 3 Years Ago
          Honestly.. I see a need for them at certain intersections but here in Philadelphia they definitely put them at "convenient" places so they can generate maximum revenue. I lived for 3 years less than 200 yards from an intersection in Roxborough part of Philadelphia. I honestly saw 1 accident there in 3 years. I know I'm not there 50% of the time.. but the time I'm there the time I get home from work (5ish) till 7am the next morning and never saw an accident. After the redlight camera you would hear "screeeech, bump" almost daily. I've since moved but it's pretty insane where they put this red light camera. I'm telling you there is at least 2 bumps in the evening rush hour everyday there. I somewhat agree that there are places that they can benefit, but they don't see to use it for that, they want to use it for revenue. That's the sad thing. It would be like a cop giving every single person that jay walks a ticket. Do people get hit by cars, yes but do they sit on these small side streets where there is no "corner" and just ticket people that walk across the street to their neighbors house? I'd have to walk 300 yards to get to my corner to cross and come back. It would be stupid for them to ticket me but that's what these cameras are doing. (Sorry to rant so much but I'm sure a lot of people feel somewhat similar)
          Quest
          • 3 Years Ago
          These cameras are placed in optimal rebvenue generation areas in every jursdiction that they have been/are used in North America. Think Not?/! Well, ask yourself what happens when the cameras don't bring the projected revenue stream... it's all out there, for various municipalities in both Canada and the US. I hope you're being sarcastic?/!
          bomgd3
          • 3 Years Ago
          I actually have to agree with you here. I don't give a damn if more people get rear-ended, as long as few people get seriously injured or killed. Better to have 10 low-speed accidents while braking quickly than to have a high-speed accident while accelerating through a light.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
    • Load More Comments