Journalism and cycling

Seth Brundle

Sure beats the usual reaction from our police force...
Driver ranting at cyclist over bike lane is firmly corrected by cops

AndrewJRenko

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Sure beats the usual reaction from our police force...
Driver ranting at cyclist over bike lane is firmly corrected by cops

Which really shows that we're a generation behind in opinions here.



There has never been a positive pro-cycling tweet from AGS. They've never challenged anti-cycling opinions, even threats against cyclists, unlike their UK peers. They make it bloody difficult to report issues (30 minute on-hold times on the TrafficWatch phone line yesterday), compared the UK, where CyclingMikey can upload a couple of videos each day and know that they will be addressed.


We've a long way to go, and we haven't even started the journey.

Paddigol

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

W
There has never been a positive pro-cycling tweet from AGS. They've never challenged anti-cycling opinions, even threats against cyclists, unlike their UK peers. They make it bloody difficult to report issues (30 minute on-hold times on the TrafficWatch phone line yesterday), compared the UK, where CyclingMikey can upload a couple of videos each day and know that they will be addressed.


We've a long way to go, and we haven't even started the journey.

Unsurprisingly, I've been stopped by them while in a pretty empty bus lane, albeit in early morning commute, and told to get out of it and use the (crappy cyclocross-esque) off-road cycle path.

magicbastarder

and it's almost certain the bus lane you were in was also a cycle lane.

Seth Brundle

For those of you following Senator Gerard Craughwell's cycling adventure through Dublin city, he travelled along the quays today and predictably, other road users showed their colours (read the full twitter thread)...
https://twitter.com/IBIKEDublin/status/1196429512755613698

Seth Brundle

^^^
Craughwell's adventure also being reported on in Saturday's edition of The Times...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b5de740e-07cd-11ea-a54d-e177f6bc2c05

CramCycle

Did himself no favours with the 4 abreast comment straight after though. He is trying to appease everyone and ends up annoying everyone.

Stark

Disappointing that he doesn't seem to have learned anything and is back to ranting about cyclists cycling 3 - 4 abreast on Twitter.

hollypink

Stark wrote: »

Disappointing that he doesn't seem to have learned anything and is back to ranting about cyclists cycling 3 - 4 abreast on Twitter.

That's really disappointing, he seemed to be genuinely open to seeing things from a cyclists perspective but it seems once he got off the bike, it went right out of his head

How can he think cyclists doing anything are worse than the worst driver out there - how could anyone who drives have so little comprehension of the extent of poor standard of driving on the roads (mobile phone use being particularly pernicious) and the injuries a car can cause?

Pinch Flat

At this stage I genuinely don’t think that people who say cyclists travel 4 abreast actually Knows what it means.

Presumably they mean side by side - but we all know this would take up well in excess of 5m of road, even if the cyclists were travelling shoulder to shoulder.

micar

Pinch Flat wrote: »

At this stage I genuinely don’t think that people who say cyclists travel 4 abreast actually Knows what it means.

Presumably they mean side by side - but we all know this would take up well in excess of 5m of road, even if the cyclists were travelling shoulder to shoulder.

I reckon looking from behind it looks like 4 abreast...but it's really 2 abreast where the front wheel of those behind slightly overlap the back wheel of those in front. So those behind are cycling to right of those in front.

So if you are looking down, it's really 2 abreast.

Wondering if a club out there is willing to do a video from behind and using a drone overhead showing what 4 abreast actually is vs 2 abreast with no overlap vs 2 abreast with slight overlap.

Perhaps it's one for the RSA.

lark

micar wrote: »

Wondering if a club out there is willing to do a video from behind and using a drone overhead showing what 4 abreast actually is vs 2 abreast with no overlap vs 2 abreast with slight overlap.

Perhaps it's one for the RSA.

This is what I'd love - myth-busting videos endorsed by the RSA. It might be too much to get them to make them, but if they were offered them on a plate and all they - and the Gardaí - needed to do is agree for their logos to be on them and to promote them, maybe they would.

Top of my list:
(1) The x cyclists abreast visual illusion, as noted above.
(2) A demonstration that a high vis jacket does virtually nothing if there's no light shining on it (e.g. cyclist coming from perpendicular road). Lights are what matter so stop using high vis as an excuse for not seeing us, when you didn't actually look. I've even got the perfect place to film this - at the junction of Earlsfort Terrace (bike travelling to the southside) and Adelaide Road (car travelling from Leeson St towards Rathmines).
(3) Virtual journey along a typical cycle lane showing why we don't always use them, or why we're not always on the extreme left of a street cycling along in the gutter.

These are 3 things motorists repeatedly give out about. Anything that helps even a few more motorists to understand would be fantastic, and would hopefully lessen the road range directed against us. I'd further link them to the moonwalking gorilla youtube clip and this more technical explanation of the SMIDSY phenomenon: londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/ . (Sorry - too new to post links but put the usual www in front.)

lark

The other thing I'd do is try to get everyone to stop using the term cyclist and motorist, except in circumstances where it's really complicated not to. In most cases 'person on bike' and 'person in car' (or variants) will do fine, and might just go some way towards reducing the 'othering' that seems to be creeping in for cyclists, where "they" (a homogeneous group that isn't "us") do this or that.

Idleater

1) and 2) could very easily be demonstrated with cars too, everyone can understand the concept that the wall of lights ahead and coming towards you are following in lanes but not necessarily exactly aligned. Similarly, a parked yellow Lamborghini (possibly outside the budget) in the dark and lit with a torch.

Hurrache

Schrodingercat wrote: »

Fine Gael Dail Candidate Verona Murphy. Scares the hell out of me if she got elected and got a transport portfolio.

She's got herself into trouble lately as she turned her most ignorant head to immigrants. She's obviously just a populist who will say any old thing to scrape the barrel for potential votes.
It's a double edged sword though, on one hand hopefully this will be the end her political aspirations, but on the other hand it means she'll be back to being George Hook of the transport industry.

check_six

Craughwell was on Pat Kenny at 9.30am this morning. Equated being overtaken by a cyclist as intimidating as being followed closely by a revving truck on Kildare St.. The cyclist *did* overtake on the left, but still seems a bit of a false equivalence. They spent a long time talking about cyclists breaking lights. Also a diversion into that tragedy on Merrion Row 20 years ago where a man died after falling and hitting his head due to being startled by a courier going the wrong way down the road. Not a lot learned in terms of the language and themes used unfortunately.

CramCycle

check_six wrote: »

Craughwell was on Pat Kenny at 9.30am this morning. Equated being overtaken by a cyclist as intimidating as being followed closely by a revving truck on Kildare St.. The cyclist *did* overtake on the left, but still seems a bit of a false equivalence. They spent a long time talking about cyclists breaking lights. Also a diversion into that tragedy on Merrion Row 20 years ago where a man died after falling and hitting his head due to being startled by a courier going the wrong way down the road. Not a lot learned in terms of the language and themes used unfortunately.

1 death in 20 years. It was a terrible tragedy but getting dragged up as part of the discussion is disgusting. Fair play to you for listening, I simply couldn't.

hollypink

check_six wrote: »

Craughwell was on Pat Kenny at 9.30am this morning. Equated being overtaken by a cyclist as intimidating as being followed closely by a revving truck on Kildare St.. The cyclist *did* overtake on the left, but still seems a bit of a false equivalence. They spent a long time talking about cyclists breaking lights. Also a diversion into that tragedy on Merrion Row 20 years ago where a man died after falling and hitting his head due to being startled by a courier going the wrong way down the road. Not a lot learned in terms of the language and themes used unfortunately.

I don't think it will have done anything to encourage people to cycle, with cycling referred to as "terrifying". I don't think any positive benefits were mentioned at all. Which is a shame, because although the near misses, close passes etc. are scary, I think cycling is generally a really pleasant way to get around the city and it's good way of fitting exercise into your day.

Nor will it do much to dampen down the antagonism some motorists have towards cyclists and the false equivalence they draw between a motorist and a cyclist committing a traffic offence

Stark

CramCycle wrote: »

1 death in 20 years. It was a terrible tragedy but getting dragged up as part of the discussion is disgusting. Fair play to you for listening, I simply couldn't.

Also, I'm sure if you said "well a helmet might have saved him", there's not a single person who wouldn't find the comment distasteful. Yet completely acceptable when it's a cyclist who's killed.

Harrybelafonte

check_six wrote: »

Craughwell was on Pat Kenny at 9.30am this morning. Equated being overtaken by a cyclist as intimidating as being followed closely by a revving truck on Kildare St.. The cyclist *did* overtake on the left, but still seems a bit of a false equivalence. They spent a long time talking about cyclists breaking lights. Also a diversion into that tragedy on Merrion Row 20 years ago where a man died after falling and hitting his head due to being startled by a courier going the wrong way down the road. Not a lot learned in terms of the language and themes used unfortunately.

And that Merrion Row story is pulled out each time this comes up while ignoring essential details to it. And the tragic end for all involved.

Eamonnator

CramCycle wrote: »

1 death in 20 years. It was a terrible tragedy but getting dragged up as part of the discussion is disgusting. Fair play to you for listening, I simply couldn't.

Yes check six, thanks for taking one for the team

Duckjob

I've given up expecting any sort of mature discussion listening to cycling pieces on a station where such pieces are bookended by car ads and car sponsorship slogans.

What Username Guidelines

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

And that Merrion Row story is pulled out each time this comes up while ignoring essential details to it. And the tragic end for all involved.

When was the merrion row incident? Are there any articles online about it?

magicbastarder

have you heard the ads for the suzuki vitara? they're toe curling. 'you've achieved everything you wanted in life, you're about to go into the most important meeting evar, but first go for a drive in your dinky SUV as the cherry on the top, and you'll feel like a real man'.

i may have slightly twisted some of the message, but stayed within the bounds of reality.

Acquiescence

magicbastarder wrote: »

i may have slightly twisted some of the message, but stayed within the bounds of reality.

Is the message not that we should indulge our inner child sometimes and have a little fun?

A to B via C can be rewarding regardless of your chosen mode of transport.

Idleater

Acquiescence wrote: »

Is the message not that we should indulge our inner child sometimes and have a little fun?
.

Yeah, it's a bit creepy though, "and now I'm going to have some fun".

The image in my head is joyriding the way it's said. First time I heard it I thought it was a new RSA "someone's not making it home" ad. I can't shake that image.

Fun and cars now is diluted. Other manufacturers use terms like "responsive" "agile" "safe" etc, fun is for the track.

magicbastarder

Acquiescence wrote: »

Is the message not that we should indulge our inner child sometimes and have a little fun?

ah here, it's an awful ad. here's the TV version, pretty much the same script:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XguAIjHQA0E

Cabaal

Honestly I think car adverts should have to reflect real world road conditions,

If they show the car driving down a road in the city during the day it shouldn't be on empty streets, it should be traffic everywhere.
Surely anything else is misleading and false advertising

CramCycle

Something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DghtxDqvPeI

Duckjob

Cabaal wrote: »

Honestly I think car adverts should have to reflect real world road conditions,

If they show the car driving down a road in the city during the day it shouldn't be on empty streets, it should be traffic everywhere.
Surely anything else is misleading and false advertising

You just need Karl and his superpower-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd6SFqRGQow