Journalism and cycling

John_Rambo

ThisRegard wrote: »

At this point I agree. As a horrible image as it is, a mangled bike and personal effects might hit home to some motorists that it's a person on the bike, not a bike that's just an impersonal piece of steel metal.

I'm with you ThisRegard, but I have a feeling our "expert" drivers in the upside down world will feel it's a photograph that cyclist should look at and "mend' their ways (ie: get off the roads and out of their way)

Again, condolences to the mans family and friends. Tragic.

Annie get your Run

Matt Cooper about to talk about why cyclists don't use cycle lanes.

magicbastarder

obviously was delayed a little - just announced that it's coming up after the current ad break.

magicbastarder

oh dear. niall ring.
at least matt cooper called him on his usual bollocks.

Annie get your Run

magicbastarder wrote: »

oh dear. niall ring.
at least matt cooper called him on his usual bollocks.

Not sure what to make of that! Lotta (?) Spoke very well but v short segment - at least Matt didn't allow too much of the whataboutery

mr spuckler

Guardian piece on potential (but unlikely) helmet usage in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/nov/24/no-plan-to-make-cycle-helmets-compulsory-in-safety-review-minister

interesting point regarding the selective interpretation by The Times for the purpose of their headline.

tomasrojo

mr spuckler wrote: »

Guardian piece on potential (but unlikely) helmet usage in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/nov/24/no-plan-to-make-cycle-helmets-compulsory-in-safety-review-minister

interesting point regarding the selective interpretation by The Times for the purpose of their headline.

I think it's even beyond selective interpretation. A Sunday Times journalist asked specifically about them, and the minister had to answer (saying he was sure it would come up in the review). Then they reported that he was considering a law. So they really were just reporting that their sister publication asked a question. Hold the front page!

TheBlaaMan

This is a piece that Chris Boardman was commissioned to write for today's Sunday Times, but when submitted, they didn't use (or even tell him they were not using....nice) https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-ris-Boardman-0

It follows on from an article in the Guardian newspaper earlier this year, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/21/bike-helmet-cyclists-safe-urban-warfare-wheels which is also worth a read.

In summary, both suggest - no surprise for many here - that use of helmets, while psychologically important for the individual, offers little or no benefit (quite the opposite) for the population as a whole, that the only thing to benefit a cycling population is better infrastructure and management/control of vehicular driving habits.

rubadub

TheBlaaMan wrote: »

This is a piece that Chris Boardman was commissioned to write for today's Sunday Times, but when submitted, they didn't use (or even tell him they were not using....nice) https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-ris-Boardman-0

fixed your link https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-chris-Boardman-0

tomasrojo

They published a piece by Andrew Gilligan on much the same topic, so I guess they got their article by other means. Very bad form not to tell CB.

mr spuckler

Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions are increasing

it seems we're likely to see fines of up to €455m in 2020.

the blurb regarding sources of emissions is telling - they don't even pretend that there's a plan to reduce transport emissions.

Transport: Emissions have increased by 3.7 per cent in 2016 and 13 per cent in the past four years. This is driven by economic and employment growth and shows no sign of abatement in the short term. Increased use of diesel more than offset a decline in petrol and biofuel use in 2016.

tomasrojo

tomasrojo wrote: »

They published a piece by Andrew Gilligan on much the same topic, so I guess they got their article by other means. Very bad form not to tell CB.

Cock-up:
https://twitter.com/Chris_Boardman/status/935150321852133376

tomasrojo

mr spuckler wrote: »

Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions are increasing

it seems we're likely to see fines of up to €455m in 2020.

the blurb regarding sources of emissions is telling - they don't even pretend that there's a plan to reduce transport emissions.

They have fairly close to an easy win by facilitating cycling in urban areas. They just don't believe in it, and won't face down loudmouth vested interests.

mr spuckler

tomasrojo wrote: »

They have fairly close to an easy win by facilitating cycling in urban areas. They just don't believe in it, and won't face down loudmouth vested interests.

not just that - they've shown no real appetite to tackle any of the sources of emissions despite signing up to the agreements and knowing that these penalties are coming.

Moflojo

Perfectly balanced, non-inflammatory opinion piece about cycling and hate speech published on Broadsheet today. Needs no further discussion.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/11/30/stop-the-cycle-of-hate/

Tombo2001

Moflojo wrote: »

Perfectly balanced, non-inflammatory opinion piece about cycling and hate speech published on Broadsheet today. Needs no further discussion.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/11/30/stop-the-cycle-of-hate/

Best not read the comments.

Moflojo

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Best not read the comments.

There are some bastions of sense ON BOTH SIDES, once you skim through the usual rhetoric.

AndrewJRenko

Moflojo wrote: »

Perfectly balanced, non-inflammatory opinion piece about cycling and hate speech published on Broadsheet today. Needs no further discussion.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/11/30/stop-the-cycle-of-hate/

It's not just me that smells a fairly strong, if subtle, anti-cycling message from Broadsheet, right?

magicbastarder

i don't think it's that they're anti-cycling, per se. i think it's that they're pro-clickbait.

Pinch Flat

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/almost-half-of-pedestrians-killed-over-festive-period-last-year-had-been-drinking-experts-warn-36367663.html

More victim blaming and hi-vis nonsense. Will we ever see a headline "December is the month where there's most drunk drivers on the roads".

Lumen

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's not just me that smells a fairly strong, if subtle, anti-cycling message from Broadsheet, right?

I don't smell that.

Chips Lovell

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Will we ever see a headline "December is the month where there's most drunk drivers on the roads".

I don't know about you, but I see headlines like that pretty much every year.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think it's that they're anti-cycling, per se. i think it's that they're pro-clickbait.

It was the 'let's put the really hairy bits in bold to rile up the commentariat' that gave it away for me.

monument

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's not just me that smells a fairly strong, if subtle, anti-cycling message from Broadsheet, right?

No, not at all.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It was the 'let's put the really hairy bits in bold to rile up the commentariat' that gave it away for me.

It’s a news / random bits digest website — putting the key bits in bold is normal for such.

AndrewJRenko

monument wrote: »

It’s a news / random bits digest website — putting the key bits in bold is normal for such.

Was it really the key bits? Or was it the 'rile em up' bits?

Moflojo

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Was it really the key bits? Or was it the 'rile em up' bits?

This is actually one of the issues that feeds into the "hate speech" argument: Media organisations know that cycling issues can be divisive (or do they frame them to be?) and will generate high levels of interaction and engagement from their audiences. Higher audience engagement figures are then used to solicit higher fees from sponsors and advertisers. Basically, having a "harmless" divisive debate about cycling is good from the coffers of media organisations, including Broadsheet. Their 'Stop the Cycle of Hate' article was the most commented on of the day. $$$

Piece from the Journal.ie today http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/fourteen-cyclist-deaths-in-2017-we-are-all-complicit-3722306-Dec2017/

As usual probably for the best you don't scroll down as far as the comments.

rubadub

Deleted User wrote: »

As usual probably for the best you don't scroll down as far as the comments.

I sometimes enjoy the comments, just picturing those "anti-cyclists" who might actually have some legitimate points who must be utterly fuming, seeing the nonsensical laughable crap others "on their side" are spouting. Also, on both sides, the "no helmet" brigade just basically holding their hands up and saying "hello I'm a willfully ignorant fcuk!!"

EDIT: to make this more clear, by "no helmet brigade" I am referring to people "on both sides" as in motorists and cyclists (or anybody) who proclaim people to be "mad" who cycle without helmets, or use other such derogatory terms. Especially as most will also refuse to rationally proclaim other people "mad" e.g. drinkers, drivers etc who do not wear helmets.

I would hope anybody who has actually researched and decided one way or the other to wear/not wear a helmet would not declare the others as "mad", therefore I optimistically presume anybody who does declare people to be "mad" are ignorant. As I have yet to find someone describing a helmet wearer as "mad" I can only conclude those calling people mad are ignorant, and this is why I only singled out the "no helmet brigade", IME there are no ignorant fcuks slagging off helmet wearers as being "mad"

gmacww

rubadub wrote: »

Also, on both sides, the "no helmet" brigade just basically holding their hands up and saying "hello I'm a willfully ignorant fcuk!!"

I don't generally get involved in discussions on boards but this bit has me confused. Who exactly are the ignorant bunch? The people who support no helmet or the people protesting no helmet laws?

Lumen

gmacww wrote: »

I don't generally get involved in discussions on boards but this bit has me confused. Who exactly are the ignorant bunch? The people who support no helmet or the people protesting no helmet laws?

Probable translation:

"No helmet brigade": people who react to stories of fatalities by complaining that cyclists ride without helmets.

Discussion here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057030568