Journalism and cycling

Steoller

Idleater wrote: »

If you're ever there, it's terrible as a pedestrian with all those bikes!

No it's not. The footpaths are wide and flat, and public transport is widely available and frequent.

Amsterdam is a little harder to negotiate as a pedestrian because some of the canalside footpaths are narrow, but I had no issues in Copenhagen as a pedestrian.

droidus

magicbastarder wrote: »

going a bit meta; journalism about journalism about cycling:

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/tv-radio-web/now-you-see-me-when-cyclists-and-motorists-collide-1.3799047

(Personally speaking, as a driver, my biggest aggravation is other drivers; as a cyclist, it’s other cyclists... Hell is other road users.)

Any cyclist who claims that other cyclists are his biggest problem... obviously doesn't cycle much.

Duckjob

I thought the Now You See Me episode on monday wasn't bad at all. For me, it correctly put strong emphasis on the need for proper infrastructure to create a safe environment for people to cycle.

- Good infrastructure means more people take to cycling
- more people taking to cycling means cycling becomes more normalised.
- cycling more normalised means driver behaviour towards people on bikes automatically improves, since more and more drivers either cycle themselves or have family/friends cycling.

IMO, "driver education" is a part, but only a smallish part of the overall cyclist safety issue. If your cycling infrastructure relies something like 95% (as ours probably does) on drivers having kind thoughts and actions towards cyclists, then you've got a big problem (as we do now) In fact, that percentage should be the other way around - when people are travelling on bikes, what drivers think of them should be totally irrelevant from a safety point of view at least 95% of the time.

Hurrache

Journalism, albeit over a century ago. A thread on why women who cycle with go to hell. Some amusing reasons as to why women shouldn't be allowed near a bike in the thread.
https://twitter.com/jodyrosen/status/1096774333408657408

Idleater

Steoller wrote: »

No it's not. The footpaths are wide and flat, and public transport is widely available and frequent.

Amsterdam is a little harder to negotiate as a pedestrian because some of the canalside footpaths are narrow, but I had no issues in Copenhagen as a pedestrian.

The comment was in jest about the prolific bicycle use, I've posted my pictures of footpads and pedestrian crossings with maybe 1m between abandoned (parked) bikes.

Copenhagen has its share of narrow streets and canals, just as Amsterdam has its share of wide ones.

Off topic anyway, i have had no trouble in either country, nor here, and have most likely fallen foul of not including the :rolleyes:

xckjoo

Hurrache wrote: »

Journalism, albeit over a century ago. A thread on why women who cycle with go to hell. Some amusing reasons as to why women shouldn't be allowed near a bike in the thread.
https://twitter.com/jodyrosen/status/1096774333408657408

Don't see many tandem bikes around these days so maybe they were successful in their campaign

Macy0161

I'm hoping to watch the show this evening. Probably wishful thinking they'd look at why sometimes we don't use the "perfectly good" cycle lanes that cede priority at junctions or dump you in a crap position at junctions (or both); the quality of the surface; up and down at every driveway; because of how they interact with pedestrians/ bus stops etc etc.

RHJ

Honestly, I can't see the Irish government on its own taking the measures necessary to implement the proper cycling infrastructure perhaps it will need to be forced on us by the EU somehow.

One action that could be taken straight away is dropping the requirement of developers to provide car parking spaces in residential apartment blocks this could, in turn, lead to more people having to the cycle or use public transport and thus increase the pressure on local politicians in Dublin to provide the necessary infrastructure.

It was an ok documentary looking forward to seeing the rest.

Grassey

RHJ wrote: »

One action that could be taken straight away is dropping the requirement of developers to provide car parking spaces in residential apartment blocks this could, in turn, lead to more people having to the cycle or use public transport and thus increase the pressure on local politicians in Dublin to provide the necessary infrastructure.

But... but... but... how would people be able to get to Howth/Glendalough etc in their weekend vehicles then :rolleyes:

RHJ

Grassey wrote: »

But... but... but... how would people be able to get to Howth/Glendalough etc in their weekend vehicles then :rolleyes:

I know imagine people's horror at having to rent a car either for the day or by the hour surely that must be a breach of one of their human rights lol

mr spuckler

RHJ wrote: »

I know imagine people's horror at having to rent a car either for the day or by the hour surely that must be a breach of one of their human rights lol

or just get the bus / DART in the case of Howth...

monument

secman wrote: »

All shapes and sizes, both bikes and riders, odd looking handlebars, long coats draping down over back wheels , civvy clothes, no helmet, no highviz, weird looking bunch, and 10kph !
Not real cyclists

The average km/h of cyclists in Denmark and the Netherlands is comparable to that of cyclists in Ireland.

Last year while with a group on a cycling study tour in Amsterdam our guided at the time talked about the lower speeds but there were mothers zooming by on electric cargo bikes. I didn’t want to chalange her but later in the day I did a few tests with my phone’s GPS and found Dutch couples cycling on front of us at at 20km/h on up right bikes and chatting away. An engineer we were with at that stage confirmed that Dutch people don’t actually all cycle real slowly.

I think part of it is seeing people cycling upright and thinking that’s slow.

Mickiemcfist

RHJ wrote: »

One action that could be taken straight away is dropping the requirement of developers to provide car parking spaces in residential apartment blocks this could, in turn, lead to more people having to the cycle or use public transport and thus increase the pressure on local politicians in Dublin to provide the necessary infrastructure.

They removed that requirement in locations with transport links last year.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/building-height-restrictions-in-towns-and-cities-lifted-37604346.html

JMcL

Grassey wrote: »

But... but... but... how would people be able to get to Howth/Glendalough etc in their weekend vehicles then :rolleyes:

Or more to the point, drive into town every weekend to collect the 65" TV, American fridge or whatever enormous appliance that they have to have driving access to the shop door for at that moment in time. Would that mean they'd have to get it delivered? The horror!

RHJ

JMcL wrote: »

Or more to the point, drive into town every weekend to collect the 65" TV, American fridge or whatever enormous appliance that they have to have driving access to the shop door for at that moment in time. Would that mean they'd have to get it delivered? The horror!

Slightly off Topic but just curious would many new apartment buildings have lifts suitable for moving large items I understand that in some apartment buildings in America they have dedicated cargo elevators for moving large things.

Cetyl Palmitate

https://rouleur.cc/editorial/ethics-cyclings-moral-compass/

axer

The Now You See Me episode did make some great points but it was ruined by whoever thought that interviewing a courier cyclist as being somewhat representative of cyclists in Dublin was a good idea. Courier cyclists from my experience are the worst type of cyclist out there. They make more money the quicker they get from A to B so its in their financial interest to break any rules that slow them down. The guy interviewed saying he breaks the law by cycling through red lights and the clips of him cycling aggressively and dangerously (for himself) and then saying it is the most dangerous city he has cycled makes it look (to the ordinary non-cyclist out there) like it is his own fault (and by extension the fault of all cyclists in Dublin due to their own behaviour). And then for him to criticise Dublin bike users... hypocracy at the highest order. What a twat.

Cetyl Palmitate

axer wrote: »

The Now You See Me episode did make some great points but it was ruined by whoever thought that interviewing a courier cyclist as being somewhat representative of cyclists in Dublin was a good idea. Courier cyclists from my experience are the worst type of cyclist out there. They make more money the quicker they get from A to B so its in their financial interest to break any rules that slow them down. The guy interviewed saying he breaks the law by cycling through red lights and the clips of him cycling aggressively and dangerously (for himself) and then saying it is the most dangerous city he has cycled makes it look (to the ordinary non-cyclist out there) like it is his own fault (and by extension the fault of all cyclists in Dublin due to their own behaviour). And then for him to criticise Dublin bike users... hypocracy at the highest order. What a twat.

No brakes either at first glance

Moflojo

I thought the Now You See Me programme was really progressive in the context of the Irish media landscape and how cycling is usually covered, but I think the episode fell into a couple of common traps:

- False Equivalence: There was repeated messaging of the notion that drivers and cyclists shoulder similar levels of responsibility. The random Paddy in Copenhagen endorsed this perspective.

- Cycling as an Extraordinary Activity: The depiction of the Donegal family's trial of cycling was ok, but it made it seem like cycling was a radical thing that people must go out of their way to attempt: Here's a senior executive from Cycling Ireland (not sure why they needed to send a member of senior management up to Donegal for that, ego?) to train you before you hit the road, help you to plan out your route, and get you all kitted out in your specialist clothing. It's very far from painting the picture of cycling as an everyday activity.

The 7.30pm Monday time slot is also pretty rubbish. People who commute by car are probably still sitting in their cars. Parents who drive their kids to school are probably in the process of getting those kids into bed. Ideally this programme should have a 9.30pm slot, on a Sunday if possible, to reach a decent audience.

If cyclists are the only ones watching the programme then it's a case of preaching to the converted.

Duckjob

Moflojo wrote: »

- Cycling as an Extraordinary Activity: The depiction of the Donegal family's trial of cycling was ok, but it made it seem like cycling was a radical thing that people must go out of their way to attempt: Here's a senior executive from Cycling Ireland (not sure why they needed to send a member of senior management up to Donegal for that, ego?) to train you before you hit the road, help you to plan out your route, and get you all kitted out in your specialist clothing. It's very far from painting the picture of cycling as an everyday activity.

I get the point you're making, and part of me groaned when I saw the family getting kitted out in hi-viz etc. But then I got to wondering if maybe they were making a deliberate attempt to contrast the realities of cycling in Ireland today (armour up, prepare for battle) with the absolute normality of cycling in Denmark (don't even think about it - just hop on and go). In other words, juxtaposing how cycling is now on top on how it could/should be.

Whether they were in fact doing this, and if so, whether or not it was effective I guess is down to individual perspectives.

Moflojo

Duckjob wrote: »

I get the point you're making, and part of me groaned when I saw the family getting kitted out in hi-viz etc. But then I got to wondering if maybe they were making a deliberate attempt to contrast the realities of cycling in Ireland today (armour up, prepare for battle) with the absolute normality of cycling in Denmark (don't even think about it - just hop on and go). In other words, juxtaposing how cycling is now on top on how it could/should be.

Whether they were in fact doing this, and if so, whether or not it was effective I guess is down to individual perspectives.

My attitude is influenced by the fact that the RSA has (I think) at least partly funded the programme and is actively promoting it.

I also suspect the RSA had a strong hand in the naming of the programme "Now You See Me", which doesn't seem to make much sense outside of a hi-vis fetishization context.

ED E

Moflojo wrote: »

My attitude is influenced by the fact that the RSA has (I think) at least partly funded the programme and is actively promoting it.

I also suspect the RSA had a strong hand in the naming of the programme "Now You See Me", which doesn't seem to make much sense outside of a hi-vis fetishization context.

The RSA and RTE co funded it.

The same company, Oddboy Media, previously did "Hows your driving" with RSA sponsorship.

Chiparus

Moflojo wrote: »

My attitude is influenced by the fact that the RSA has (I think) at least partly funded the programme and is actively promoting it.

I also suspect the RSA had a strong hand in the naming of the programme "Now You See Me", which doesn't seem to make much sense outside of a hi-vis fetishization context.

I would disagree as the most common refrain I hear is "Sorry, I did'nt see you"

Now you see me, I feel is about building awareness in the 90% of motorists that don't cycle.

Moflojo

Chiparus wrote: »

I would disagree as the most common refrain I hear is "Sorry, I did'nt see you"

Now you see me, I feel is about building awareness in the 90% of motorists that don't cycle.

That's a fair point regarding SMIDSYs, and it hadn't really occurred to me that that was the connection to the title. It does give me grounds for further criticism though, when one compares the explicit nature of "How's My Driving?" with a programme about cycling entitled "Now You See Me" and the bizarre use of the hashtag #NYSM, as if #NowYouSeeMe is too long for people to cope with! It reeks of middle-aged PR types trying to be down with the kids.

eeeee

axer wrote: »

The Now You See Me episode did make some great points but it was ruined by whoever thought that interviewing a courier cyclist as being somewhat representative of cyclists in Dublin was a good idea. Courier cyclists from my experience are the worst type of cyclist out there. They make more money the quicker they get from A to B so its in their financial interest to break any rules that slow them down. The guy interviewed saying he breaks the law by cycling through red lights and the clips of him cycling aggressively and dangerously (for himself) and then saying it is the most dangerous city he has cycled makes it look (to the ordinary non-cyclist out there) like it is his own fault (and by extension the fault of all cyclists in Dublin due to their own behaviour). And then for him to criticise Dublin bike users... hypocracy at the highest order. What a twat.

Disagree with this, he has obviously excellent bike handling skills and his point about Dublin bikers is warranted in my experience.
The brakes think wouldn't come into consideration for me at all. I ride, commute on and race fixed gear bikes and I feel a hell of a lot safer and I have feictonnes more control fixed than with a freewheel.
It was an honest interview I thought, and he actually acquitted himself well.
Couriers are professional bike riders, I can't remember the last time I heard of one being killed in action, which, when you think of the hours they spend in the busiest streets in the country speaks volumes about how they keep themselves safe. Also they can't work when injured.
I don't have the the skills to ride like a courier, so I don't. I don't condone everything they do, some ride like absolute arseholes, but I didn't hear or see anything to pull the courier up on in that programme.

axer

nee wrote: »

Disagree with this, he has obviously excellent bike handling skills and his point about Dublin bikers is warranted in my experience.
The brakes think wouldn't come into consideration for me at all. I ride, commute on and race fixed gear bikes and I feel a hell of a lot safer and I have feictonnes more control fixed than with a freewheel.
It was an honest interview I thought, and he actually acquitted himself well.
Couriers are professional bike riders, I can't remember the last time I heard of one being killed in action, which, when you think of the hours they spend in the busiest streets in the country speaks volumes about how they keep themselves safe. Also they can't work when injured.
I don't have the the skills to ride like a courier, so I don't. I don't condone everything they do, some ride like absolute arseholes, but I didn't hear or see anything to pull the courier up on in that programme.

Absolute rubbish. The clips of him cycling show him riding dangerously between traffic. He openly admitted to breaking red lights. Just because someone is paid to cycle or drive doesn't make them better at it. From my experience cycling through dublin daily I can say hands down courier cyclists are the most dangerous cyclists out there and the ones that give cyclists the worst name. We have no idea what the injury rate is for courier cyclists - we only hear about fatalities. I wouldn't call cycling in such a way that you are relying on others to keep you safe, because you are cycling dangerously, a skill. I have the skills to ride like a courier but im not so inconsiderate of others on the shared space (or care so little for my health/life) to ride like that.

eeeee

axer wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. The clips of him cycling show him riding dangerously between traffic. He openly admitted to breaking red lights. Just because someone is paid to cycle or drive doesn't make them better at it. From my experience cycling through dublin daily I can say hands down courier cyclists are the most dangerous cyclists out there and the ones that give cyclists the worst name. We have no idea what the injury rate is for courier cyclists - we only hear about fatalities. I wouldn't call cycling in such a way that you are relying on others to keep you safe, because you are cycling dangerously, a skill. I have the skills to ride like a courier but im not so inconsiderate of others on the shared space (or care so little for my health/life) to ride like that.

We'll have to agree to disagree - have met very, very few regular riders with courier like bike handling skills. Very few. The best bike handler I know even used to be one!
I didn't say that being a professional bike rider absolves him from all opprobrium.
I can honestly say courier riders aren't even on my radar day to day as far as dangerous riding goes.
The most dangerous cycling I see is people moving in and out around cars, holes on the road etc. without looking behind them. I see this several times a day. Or the old hand out and move. I haven't seen a courier wander out in front of traffic with no awareness the way the other riders do.

CramCycle

I ride like that all the time. The camera makes it look far worse than it is.He will get a hard time for riding through the pedestrians because he did, even though he had a green, they are still pedestrians and you just have to suck that up.

Some flower pots were placed to protect the cycle lane on Ryders Row

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/flower-boxes-dublin-cycle-lane/

Mc Love

Are they official?