Journalism and cycling

magicbastarder · 16-11-2018 10:00am

i like the way the indo is clearly talking about general attacks on bus drivers but the article reads a little like they're saying there are four attacks by cyclists on bus drivers a day.

Thinkingaboutit · 16-11-2018 1:04pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

This bit confused me...

Was the cyclist moving towards the bus or away from it?
Either way doesn't really make sense though.
Presumably the cyclist was moving with traffic so why would they come all the way back to the bus and why would the driver think the bike could end up under the bus.

Anyhow the indo is down there with the likes of the sun

Probably worse as the Sun doesn't even pretend to be some sort of 'paper of record.'

Chiparus · 16-11-2018 1:40pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

This bit confused me...

Was the cyclist moving towards the bus or away from it?
Either way doesn't really make sense though.
Presumably the cyclist was moving with traffic so why would they come all the way back to the bus and why would the driver think the bike could end up under the bus.

Anyhow the indo is down there with the likes of the sun

Are bus drivers not obliged to report all assaults?

Surely there would be a cctv recording?

Ray Bloody Purchase · 16-11-2018 1:45pm

Chiparus wrote: »

Are bus drivers not obliged to report all assaults?

Surely there would be a cctv recording?

The headline screams that he 'threw the bike at the bus' which is also repeated in the first line.

The actual quote from the bus driver is "He threw the bike in front of the bus..."

The two things are slightly different. :rolleyes:

Thinkingaboutit · 16-11-2018 2:29pm

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

The headline screams that he 'threw the bike at the bus' which is also repeated in the first line.

The actual quote from the bus driver is "He threw the bike in front of the bus..."

The two things are slightly different. :rolleyes:

'in front of' means there definitely would be CCTV, but if it hasn't appeared, what actually happened differed from what the driver stated.

monument · 16-11-2018 5:36pm

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

'in front of' means there definitely would be CCTV, but if it hasn't appeared, what actually happened differed from what the driver stated.

The driver said on Today with SOR that the Gardai said there was not enough evidence against the cyclists.

CramCycle · 16-11-2018 5:49pm

monument wrote: »

The driver said on Today with SOR that the Gardai said there was not enough evidence against the cyclists.

Please tell me that means that the driver is releasing the CCTV, I am sure he wants his day in the public court. I imagine the driver was told that maybe he cyclist was in the wrong but so were you, and you'll both end up under the hammer as opposed to one of you under a bus.

radia · 17-11-2018 12:41pm

Many a true word said in jest...

For those who don't follow Ross O'Carroll Kelly in the Irish Times, his father Charles has established a right-wing political party for rich people, New Republic. In today's instalment, some of the members have been sounding out Peter Casey to take over as leader:

“Picking on the Travellers,” he goes. “It was absolutely inspired. It’s the kind of thing I would have come up with myself except I stopped relying on my instincts. You see, a while ago, Hennessy and I retained the services of a company called Merrion Analytics. Oh, the work they do is very impressive. They can feed polling data into a computer and come up with profiles of marginalised people that it’s perfectly okay to dislike. We were going to use the information to play on the prejudices of the electorate in certain closely contested constituencies in the next election. They suggested our bogey group should be lactose-intolerant cyclists from the southern Border counties.”

tomasrojo · 17-11-2018 2:45pm

The thing is though that it's not ok to dislike Travellers: you'll definitely get push-back very promptly if you do it, although apparently you can leverage it in unusually imbalanced elections. You can have a go at cyclists and vegans and people with red hair with relative impunity. It's still not right though. It's usually lame and lazy, at the very least, and it can have very negative effects for some individuals.

buffalo · 17-11-2018 4:28pm

tomasrojo wrote: »

The thing is though that it's not ok to dislike Travellers: you'll definitely get push-back very promptly if you do it, although apparently you can leverage it in unusually imbalanced elections. You can have a go at cyclists and vegans and people with red hair with relative impunity. It's still not right though. It's usually lame and lazy, at the very least, and it can have very negative effects for some individuals.

I enjoyed this commentary: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/free-speech-in-ireland-1.3691144

The suppression of free speech in Ireland, has, as many of your letter writers have asserted, gone too far. It is no longer possible to openly articulate and express viewpoints that are regarded as politically incorrect or outside the narrow confines of “acceptable” opinion.

Take the case of Peter Casey, the man who recently ran for the presidency. He made unfashionable remarks about Travellers and their ethnic status. For this his views have been actively suppressed or demeaned by a liberal media enthralled by its devotion to the god of political correctness.

Look at the way he has been confined to appearances on the Late Late Show, Today with Sean O’Rourke, the Marian Finucane Show, Pat Kenny Tonight, the Ray D’Arcy Show, Prime Time, the Niall Boylan Show, and Ireland AM. He has also been restricted to a variety of other national and local radio stations, like Galway Bay FM, Tipp FM and Highland Radio, and to mere interviews with many national media outlets, most recently Hot Press.

With this kind of active marginalisation of alternative views, who in their right mind would choose to express them?

PS oh look, the Niall Boylan Show! :rolleyes:

Tombo2001 · 19-11-2018 12:59pm

I would genuinely wonder at this point whether some products feel that putting the boot into cyclists is something they can do as part of an advertising campaign.

I noted a big ad for Dublin Car Parks - the one that shows how many car park spaces are free - posting a big 'Cyclists Light UP' notice before the car park space numbers came up.

These ads are directly targeted at drivers. They never have a similar message for drivers - e.g. Drivers Put Down the Phone.....

AndrewJRenko · 19-11-2018 1:14pm

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I would genuinely wonder at this point whether some products feel that putting the boot into cyclists is something they can do as part of an advertising campaign.

I noted a big ad for Dublin Car Parks - the one that shows how many car park spaces are free - posting a big 'Cyclists Light UP' notice before the car park space numbers came up.

These ads are directly targeted at drivers. They never have a similar message for drivers - e.g. Drivers Put Down the Phone.....

These ads are really terrible. All the evidence shows that smoking is really bad for your health, and they are encouraging it! Are they trying to wipe us out or what?

Eamonnator · 19-11-2018 2:01pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

These ads are really terrible. All the evidence shows that smoking is really bad for your health, and they are encouraging it! Are they trying to wipe us out or what?

It took a minute.

magicbastarder · 19-11-2018 5:46pm

on radio 1 at the moment - they're talking about dashcams; but will be talking about data protection issues, which would also apply to cyclists.

magicbastarder · 19-11-2018 5:57pm

well, that ended on a slightly surreal note. aine lawlor asked the barrister they had on whether he'd wear a camera on his bike helmet (he's a cyclist) and his response was 'no, because if you come off your bike with a helmet with a camera mounted to it, it can break your neck'.

poor aine lawlor spluttered a little in surprise.

Tell me how · 19-11-2018 6:50pm

Jeremy Vine show

Corca Baiscinn · 19-11-2018 7:13pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

well, that ended on a slightly surreal note. aine lawlor asked the barrister they had on whether he'd wear a camera on his bike helmet (he's a cyclist) and his response was 'no, because if you come off your bike with a helmet with a camera mounted to it, it can break your neck'.

poor aine lawlor spluttered a little in surprise.

This evening was the second time in a week I heard that said, never having heard it before, I wonder if there are studies to that effect.

Interview was interesting, I started by being ready to dismiss whatever the barrister was going to say on the basis that a car reg can't be matched to identity by an ordinary member of the public unless they know the person already, as in, "Oh that's Jimmy's car". And also because if WMP Police actively ask for it how could it be in breach of GDPR which is European rather than Irish legislation? But as William Bullman went on I could see that maybesome of his point re regulation has validity.

I was disappointed that his point re dash-cam & by inference cycle-cam evidence not being reliable because of the possibility of tampering with it gives support to the garda reluctance to accept same but again how come other police forces seem to be able to get over that hurdle?

magicbastarder · 19-11-2018 7:25pm

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

This evening was the second time in a week I heard that said, never having heard it before, I wonder if there are studies to that effect.

first i heard of anything along those lines was in relation to the accident that nearly killed michael schumacher. there was lots of speculation that the helmet cam did the damage, though in the sense that it pierced or compromised the helmet, rather than causing neck rotation.

what_traffic · 19-11-2018 7:39pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

poor aine lawlor spluttered a little in surprise.

Pretty sure it was Mary Wilson? No? At least she allowed him to expand on the point.

19-11-2018 8:04pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Jeremy Vine show

Saw this posted on the comments there

AndrewJRenko · 19-11-2018 9:47pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

first i heard of anything along those lines was in relation to the accident that nearly killed michael schumacher. there was lots of speculation that the helmet cam did the damage, though in the sense that it pierced or compromised the helmet, rather than causing neck rotation.

That seems to have been a bit of a myth;

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2014/10/15/gopro-may-pursue-legal-action-against-journalist-for-false-schumacher-crash-accusations/

Macy0161 · 19-11-2018 11:40pm

Corca Baiscinn wrote:

I was disappointed that his point re dash-cam & by inference cycle-cam evidence not being reliable because of the possibility of tampering with it gives support to the garda reluctance to accept same but again how come other police forces seem to be able to get over that hurdle?

But again, just over the weekend, the gardai were looking for dashcam footage from anyone in the vicinity of the crime at hand. It's submissible when it suits them.

RobbieMD · 20-11-2018 12:39am

Macy0161 wrote: »

But again, just over the weekend, the gardai were looking for dashcam footage from anyone in the vicinity of the crime at hand. It's submissible when it suits them.

I presume you mean the recent murder in Kildare, a crime of that magnitude means the Gardai can seize the dashcam if it contains evidence.It would be examined, much like the infamous "rape tape" from the Corrib gas works incident a few years ago. Remember that recording had been edited.... It not as easy as the lay person might assume to get recordings admitted into evidence. Most dashcam owners wouldn't be happy if they had to surrender their Micro Sd card unedited.

And the Gardai simply don't have the resources IT wise to run every minor road traffic offence caught on dash cam. I think the papers had it recently that there was a 4yr wait to examine seized IT equipment in Garda HQ. For a murder investigation all the stops are pulled out, not so much for a minor breach of the road traffic act.

Also due to our legal system it means giving a written statement to Gardai. The offender is informed. They may/may not speak to Gardai. If a dashcam is to be used in evidence then that has to be "proven" before it can be viewed in court. The person who reported the driving offence will also be required in court to give evidence if it goes to a hearing. The hearing may not happen on the first date set. The person who reported the driving offence gets annoyed with the Garda who is now prosecuting it. They're missing days in work or whatever.

Or a Garda can head out in a patrol car and stop someone on the phone or whatever and issue a ticket. If the driver contests it, only the Garda is needed in court. He/she probably will have a few cases up anyway. Way simpler. Smarter use of resources for the same outcome and avoiding hours of paperwork.
Of course, some road traffic offences are more serious and deserve a full investigation, however resources may mean lesser offences go by the way side.

Macy0161 · 21-11-2018 10:56am

RobbieMD wrote: »

Of course, some road traffic offences are more serious and deserve a full investigation, however resources may mean lesser offences go by the way side.

And yet, UK police forces have systems that dash and bikecam footage can be submitted and used for RTA's online. No need for analysis or the physical storage devide. I'm not sure what editing you would do to make a safe pass look like a close pass anyway, or why anyone would bother. Just another excuse when they don't really see it as a proper crime.

Hurrache · 21-11-2018 12:04pm

At least motorists have moved on from blocking cycle lanes
https://twitter.com/OldManRodgers/status/1065174433915125760

droidus · 21-11-2018 12:31pm

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2018/nov/21/ten-everyday-ways-drivers-make-cyclists-feel-unsafe

circler · 22-11-2018 9:32am

Drivers could be given cheaper insurance if they take cycle training, while police will make it easier for people to submit video clips showing dangerous driving, under a new plan to protect vulnerable road users announced by the government.

The two-year scheme will also see a new “cycling and walking champion” appointed, with councils encouraged to spend 15% of their transport budget on active travel.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/22/drivers-who-pass-cycle-training-scheme-could-get-cheaper-insurance