Irish Times - Rag

ConorGoodman · 17-06-2013 02:25PM

Hi,
Just a few clarifying points from The Irish Times for anyone who is interested.

1. The purpose of the current On Your Bike series is to explore cycling from a lifestyle and transport/infrastructure points of view. We are certainly not anti-cycling, and in fact the opening article in the series explored the growth in popularity of cycling. As the person who commisioned the series (and a keen cyclist myself), I do wish to explore what the impediments are to further growth in cycling as a means of transport. These include unusitable roads, safety concerns, low cycling rates among children and women, poor road behaviour by cyclists (and motorists and pedestrians).

2. Fintan O'Toole and Frank McNally were not instructed to "lob grenades" on the subject. Columnists in the paper have a fair degree of autonomy in the subjects they cover, and as cycling has been a matter of public discourse in the run-up to Bike Week, it's not surprising that took up the issue. I'm delighted they did.

3. For those intested in the subject, there will be more articles on Tuesday (encouraging/assisting children to cycle); Wednesday (cycling holidays) and Thursday (rural cycling). It's a broad subject and it's not possible to cover every aspect of it in a series of newspaper articles, but I hope these pieces make a useful contribution to a public debate on cycling over the coming days.

Thanks, Conor Goodman, Irish Times features editor

Tombo2001 · 17-06-2013 02:31PM

Hi Conor, thats an interesting viewpoint.

Its not for me to say what the purpose of the 'On Your Bike' series has been.

However, as a cyclist I would say that I wish the series had never happened. It appears to me to have consisted of some very anti-cyclist articles (not anti-cycling, but specfically anti-cyclist). The Fintan O'Toole piece is the one piece that everyone will remember from it, but the negative attitude towards cyclists in that piece is reinforced by other articles, not just in the current On Your Bike series, but also in the newspaper over recent years.

Motorists already have a very negative attitude towards cyclists, and pieces such as the one by Fintan O'Toole serve to validate this attitude.

droidus · 17-06-2013 02:33PM

ConorGoodman wrote: »

1. The purpose of the current On Your Bike series is to explore cycling from a lifestyle and transport/infrastructure points of view. We are certainly not anti-cycling, and in fact the opening article in the series explored the growth in popularity of cycling. As the person who commisioned the series (and a keen cyclist myself), I do wish to explore what the impediments are to further growth in cycling as a means of transport. These include unusitable roads, safety concerns, low cycling rates among children and women, poor road behaviour by cyclists (and motorists and pedestrians).

You could add 'negative portrayals of cyclists in the media' to that list. Perhaps include an interview with Fintan O Toole?

2. Fintan O'Toole and Frank McNally were not instructed to "lob grenades" on the subject. Columnists in the paper have a fair degree of autonomy in the subjects they cover, and as cycling has been a matter of public discourse in the run-up to Bike Week, it's not surprising that took up the issue. I'm delighted they did.

Yes, it was truly delightful to see the Times vying with the Daily Mail and The Telegraph for 'who can publish the most stupid rant about cyclists' award 2013. I hear that the Times is in with a good chance this year.

Bluefoam · 17-06-2013 02:54PM

ConorGoodman wrote: »

Hi,
Just a few clarifying points from The Irish Times for anyone who is interested.

1. The purpose of the current On Your Bike series is to explore cycling from a lifestyle and transport/infrastructure points of view. We are certainly not anti-cycling, and in fact the opening article in the series explored the growth in popularity of cycling. As the person who commisioned the series (and a keen cyclist myself), I do wish to explore what the impediments are to further growth in cycling as a means of transport. These include unusitable roads, safety concerns, low cycling rates among children and women, poor road behaviour by cyclists (and motorists and pedestrians).

2. Fintan O'Toole and Frank McNally were not instructed to "lob grenades" on the subject. Columnists in the paper have a fair degree of autonomy in the subjects they cover, and as cycling has been a matter of public discourse in the run-up to Bike Week, it's not surprising that took up the issue. I'm delighted they did.

3. For those intested in the subject, there will be more articles on Tuesday (encouraging/assisting children to cycle); Wednesday (cycling holidays) and Thursday (rural cycling). It's a broad subject and it's not possible to cover every aspect of it in a series of newspaper articles, but I hope these pieces make a useful contribution to a public debate on cycling over the coming days.

Thanks, Conor Goodman, Irish Times features editor

Conor, thank you for responding. I still believe that the overall negative tone of the series is very damaging to the cycling community and supports many of the negative stereotypical views held by many. To be honest, I believe that by supporting these views you are actually endangering the safety of cyclists on the road. You are giving fuel to allot of road users who already feel that they have an entitlement to the roadways...

buffalo · 17-06-2013 03:13PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Or another way to put it - my worst day on the bike is nearly always better than my best day in the car!

On a re-read, you have a point, but I think the positives are lost among the overwhelming tone of stress, hassle, falling, etc. 16 paragraphs, I count three positive ones.

Indeed, even the headline is more negative than positive: "Tumbles, tantrums and tales". And the byline? "After six months in the saddle and two falls, the stress of my inadequacy on a bike is giving me grey hairs". It even opens with the line, "If I die on my bike..." It's hardly selling cycling.

I remember the Times featured the account of someone taking cycling lessons, and what they learned about handling themselves on the road. I'd love to see a follow-up piece featuring this writer, and see how she feels about cycling then.

buffalo · 17-06-2013 03:26PM

Conor, always good to see some interaction with the community, thanks for posting!

ConorGoodman wrote: »

Hi,
Just a few clarifying points from The Irish Times for anyone who is interested.

1. The purpose of the current On Your Bike series is to explore cycling from a lifestyle and transport/infrastructure points of view. We are certainly not anti-cycling, and in fact the opening article in the series explored the growth in popularity of cycling. As the person who commisioned the series (and a keen cyclist myself), I do wish to explore what the impediments are to further growth in cycling as a means of transport. These include unusitable roads, safety concerns, low cycling rates among children and women, poor road behaviour by cyclists (and motorists and pedestrians).

I presume you mean this piece: http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/on-your-bike-rise-of-the-cyclist-1.1429031?page=1
"Far more Irish people are riding bikes to work now, and on safer roads, than a decade ago. Shame more of them aren’t better cyclists."
The highlighted part was totally unnecessary, and not even relevant to the article - it doesn't explain whether "better" means better at obeying the laws, or better at cycling. I certainly took it as a snide implication of the former.

The other articles on that page in the Weekend supplement were "A virtuous cyclist, for one day only", and "Riding too fast, running red lights, clipping wing mirrors". I was left with a certain impression of the IT's view of cyclists.

I look forward to the future work though.

ConorGoodman wrote: »

2. Fintan O'Toole and Frank McNally were not instructed to "lob grenades" on the subject. Columnists in the paper have a fair degree of autonomy in the subjects they cover, and as cycling has been a matter of public discourse in the run-up to Bike Week, it's not surprising that took up the issue. I'm delighted they did.

Op-ed pieces are what they are. I find Fintan's pieces are usually more well thought-out, this seems to have brewing for a while. I don't know the area of the city he means, but usually there is a logical reason for footpath cycling, though perhaps not a defensible one. Perhaps he could have spoken with said offenders, instead of ranting. That said, he has a point. I just think he didn't make it very well.

ConorGoodman wrote: »

3. For those intested in the subject, there will be more articles on Tuesday (encouraging/assisting children to cycle); Wednesday (cycling holidays) and Thursday (rural cycling). It's a broad subject and it's not possible to cover every aspect of it in a series of newspaper articles, but I hope these pieces make a useful contribution to a public debate on cycling over the coming days.

Thanks, Conor Goodman, Irish Times features editor

So far there's been a lot of stereotyping and generalising (imo), which only polarises the debate, but I'll wait until the end of the week to make a judgement. But again, thanks for coming on to make a contribution here.

Tombo2001 · 17-06-2013 03:33PM

buffalo wrote: »

Conor, always good to see some interaction with the community, thanks for posting!

I presume you mean this piece: http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/on-your-bike-rise-of-the-cyclist-1.1429031?page=1
"Far more Irish people are riding bikes to work now, and on safer roads, than a decade ago. Shame more of them aren’t better cyclists."
The highlighted part was totally unnecessary, and not even relevant to the article - it doesn't explain whether "better" means better at obeying the laws, or better at cycling. I certainly took it as a snide implication of the former.

The other articles on that page in the Weekend supplement were "A virtuous cyclist, for one day only", and "Riding too fast, running red lights, clipping wing mirrors". I was left with a certain impression of the IT's view of cyclists.

I look forward to the future work though.

Op-ed pieces are what they are. I find Fintan's pieces are usually more well thought-out, this seems to have brewing for a while. I don't know the area of the city he means, but usually there is a logical reason for footpath cycling, though perhaps not a defensible one. Perhaps he could have spoken with said offenders, instead of ranting. That said, he has a point. I just think he didn't make it very well.

So far there's been a lot of stereotyping and generalising (imo), which only polarises the debate, but I'll wait until the end of the week to make a judgement. But again, thanks for coming on to make a contribution here.

FYI

Fintan O'Toole lives in Glasnevin.

The two main arteries towards his gaff would be Drumcondra Road and Mobhi Road.

On both of those roads, there are cycle paths that switch from the street to the footpath back onto the street again.

The markings in both cases are quite poor, but these cycle paths do exist.

I have seen a number of letters in the Irish Times over the years from residents of Drumcondra/ Glasnevin moaning about cyclists on the footpath.

But the fact of the matter is, they are entitled to be there. This fact is never mentioned in any of the anti-cyclist rants that emanate from said districts.

droidus · 17-06-2013 03:52PM

He was talking about the path outside DCU on Collins Ave.

Which suggests the rant could just have easily been targeted at inconsiderate students rather than cyclists.

Tombo2001 · 17-06-2013 05:11PM

The problem here as I see it, and I think its evident in Conor Goodman's post......is that the Irish Times wants the dual position of being pro-cycling (in keeping with its liberal aspirations) and anti-cyclist (in keeping with the populist/ motorist view).

Its all perfectly fine to write about the joys of cycling the greenway from Newport through to Achill.........but I would guess that 90% of the cycling trips in this country are commutes. The scenery on the western seaboard has feck all to do with making your way through Dublin/ Cork/ Limerick city centre on a wet Tuesday morning in November.

The IT is promoting the former while kicking the latter. (That is to say, it has had nothing positive to say about cycling commuters and but has gone out of its way to highlight the negative). That is the papers viewpoint as far as I can see.

I've often complained in the past that the Irish Times rarely takes a strong view on any subject. Unfortunately it has chosen this one as an exception.

galwaycyclist · 17-06-2013 05:28PM

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The problem here as I see it, and I think its evident in Conor Goodman's post......is that the Irish Times wants the dual position of being pro-cycling (in keeping with its liberal aspirations) and anti-cyclist (in keeping with the populist/ motorist view).

Its all perfectly fine to write about the joys of cycling the greenway from Newport through to Achill.........but I would guess that 90% of the cycling trips in this country are commutes. The scenery on the western seaboard has feck all to do with making your way through Dublin/ Cork/ Limerick city centre on a wet Tuesday morning in November.

The IT is promoting the former while kicking the latter. (That is to say, it has had nothing positive to say about cycling commuters and but has gone out of its way to highlight the negative). That is the papers viewpoint as far as I can see.

I've often complained in the past that the Irish Times rarely takes a strong view on any subject. Unfortunately it has chosen this one as an exception.

It is useful to compare and contrast the approach of the Irish Times with that of the London Times "Cities fit for Cycling" campaign.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/

The London Times at least had the courtesy and good grace to sit down with the cycling lobby and inform themselves what the issues were and what solutions might be needed.

Econoline Van · 17-06-2013 05:34PM

ConorGoodman wrote: »

Hi,
Just a few clarifying points from The Irish Times for anyone who is interested.

As a daily buyer of the IT, I'd just like to state that I agree with the OP and have felt that the overall tone of the cycling articles has been ridiculously negative.

However, we IT readers are a sensible lot (well, (mostly) any reader I've ever met) so I doubt they'll have some horrible repercussions on driver behaviour or whether someone cycles a bike or not.

P.S. More articles by Patrick Freyne please (if that's possible.....the poor lad must be worn out at this stage)

Dermot Illogical · 17-06-2013 05:39PM

McTigs wrote: »

Why is it that there is an underlying assumption from non cyclists that people principally cycle for 2 reasons a) The envoirnment and b) can't afford a car when most of the time it's neither

This, and the assumption that once you get on a bike you're been assimilated into some sub-species and must take responsibility for the actions of everyone else in that sub-species. Because obviously you share their ideas, behaviour and motivations.

Dermot Illogical · 17-06-2013 05:40PM

Econoline Van wrote: »

However, we IT readers are a sensible lot (well, (mostly) any reader I've ever met) so I doubt they'll have some horrible repercussions on driver behaviour or whether someone cycles a bike or not.

Are there enough of you left to make a noticeable difference?

MediaMan · 17-06-2013 05:57PM

I would be only slightly miffed by the negative stereotyping of cyclists in the IT, if it was just about hurting our feelings. What makes it much more serious than that is that there is a minority of drivers on our roads that think that cyclists have lesser entitlement to use the road than motorized vehicles. By extension these people believe that if a cyclist has the audacity to go on the road at all, then they should get out of the way when a car comes along, because the cars have more right to the road.

It's a short step from there to intimidating cyclists to get out of the way or off the road when it suits a driver. I was nearly run off the road on Saturday while I was cycling in the countryside, because a driver couldn't wait about 30-60 seconds for a clear stretch of road on which to pass me. After honking at me for a bit (presumably wanting me to cycle in the ditch), the person squeezed pass with inches to spare, and then veered in front of me, presumably to "teach me a lesson". That was scary.

The problem with the IT approach to negative stereotyping of cyclists and cycling, and especially the Fintan O'Toole article, is that, without actually saying it, it encourages these rogue drivers to mistreat cyclists, by generalizing from bad cyclists to infer that all cyclists are evil and crazy. No cyclist, good or bad, should be intimidated on the road. Bad cycling, just like bad driving, should be addressed. Newspapers, even though their primary purpose is commercial, should promote mutual respect and understanding between road users, while addressing the issues. It's too serious a topic to deal with it in any other way.

Econoline Van · 17-06-2013 06:00PM

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Are there enough of you left to make a noticeable difference?

Ha! A good point!

Jawgap · 17-06-2013 06:06PM

buffalo wrote: »

On a re-read, you have a point, but I think the positives are lost among the overwhelming tone of stress, hassle, falling, etc. 16 paragraphs, I count three positive ones.

Indeed, even the headline is more negative than positive: "Tumbles, tantrums and tales". And the byline? "After six months in the saddle and two falls, the stress of my inadequacy on a bike is giving me grey hairs". It even opens with the line, "If I die on my bike..." It's hardly selling cycling.

I remember the Times featured the account of someone taking cycling lessons, and what they learned about handling themselves on the road. I'd love to see a follow-up piece featuring this writer, and see how she feels about cycling then.

Oh come on - who among us has not left instructions with our loved ones that in the event of an accident, make sure to check what the Guards did with the bike? Or not thought about whether the bike would fit in the ambulance with you........

.......just me?:)

Anyway, I think in 6 months the only resonant fallout from all this will be the quote....."The cyclist is Christ on a bike, martyr and saviour all in one"

In fact someone should do up a bike jersey with 'martyr' on one side and "saviour" on the other!

Dermot Illogical · 17-06-2013 06:08PM

Jawgap wrote: »

In fact someone should do up a bike jersey with 'martyr' on one side and "saviour" on the other!

Half-hearted. Ink FTW.

Chips Lovell · 17-06-2013 06:16PM

Having lived and cycled in Dublin city centre for years now, I'm still amazed at how some people can claim the only way to cycle safely is by breaking road traffic laws, such as breaking lights or going the wrong way down a one way street.

galwaycyclist · 17-06-2013 06:19PM

MediaMan wrote: »

I would be only slightly miffed by the negative stereotyping of cyclists in the IT, if it was just about hurting our feelings. What makes it much more serious than that is that there is a minority of drivers on our roads that think that cyclists have lesser entitlement to use the road than motorized vehicles. By extension these people believe that if a cyclist has the audacity to go on the road at all, then they should get out of the way when a car comes along, because the cars have more right to the road.

It's a short step from there to intimidating cyclists to get out of the way or off the road when it suits a driver. I was nearly run off the road on Saturday while I was cycling in the countryside, because a driver couldn't wait about 30-60 seconds for a clear stretch of road on which to pass me. After honking at me for a bit (presumably wanting me to cycle in the ditch), the person squeezed pass with inches to spare, and then veered in front of me, presumably to "teach me a lesson". That was scary.

The problem with the IT approach to negative stereotyping of cyclists and cycling, and especially the Fintan O'Toole article, is that, without actually saying it, it encourages these rogue drivers to mistreat cyclists, by generalizing from bad cyclists to infer that all cyclists are evil and crazy. No cyclist, good or bad, should be intimidated on the road. Bad cycling, just like bad driving, should be addressed. Newspapers, even though their primary purpose is commercial, should promote mutual respect and understanding between road users, while addressing the issues. It's too serious a topic to deal with it in any other way.

This is indeed the problem. What is going on with the Irish Times, particularly with stuff like the O'Toole piece, is not far off standard, tribal, incitement to hatred in the fine tradition of Robert Mugabe, Ian Paisley etc.

As always, this stuff is as much about the perpetrators trying to make themselves feel powerful by picking on a group that they perceive to be weak and trying to whip up their followers into a frenzy of indignation and "righteous" anger.

In the circumstances, protests like "I cycle myself" are the moral equivalent of "some of my best friend are black" etc.

It is particularly nasty, given that in this case, the target "out group" are already exposed to lethal force by those who are being incited against them. This is not just about trying to justify depriving resources from the less "favoured" tribe.

radia · 17-06-2013 06:27PM

Tombo2001 wrote: »

FYI

Fintan O'Toole lives in Glasnevin.

The two main arteries towards his gaff would be Drumcondra Road and Mobhi Road.

On both of those roads, there are cycle paths that switch from the street to the footpath back onto the street again.

The markings in both cases are quite poor, but these cycle paths do exist.

I have seen a number of letters in the Irish Times over the years from residents of Drumcondra/ Glasnevin moaning about cyclists on the footpath.

But the fact of the matter is, they are entitled to be there. This fact is never mentioned in any of the anti-cyclist rants that emanate from said districts.

Yes, the cycle paths are on the pavement - and they're crap.
Here are a couple of photos that I'm pretty sure are from Mobhi Road:

A bin and a lamppost parked in what the markings suggest is a 2-way cycle track.

A nice slippy, swampy surface, perfect for braking to avoid pedestrians - NOT!

And you will need to avoid pedestrians because there's a bus stop fighting for space with cyclists along this stretch too.
Not to mention braking suddenly to avoid traffic pulling out of Na Fianna GAA club, which doesn't expect it'll have to pause for fast moving traffic until it reaches the roadside, despite the fact that the cycle path is in the pavement zone.

It's a fair slope downhill, so bikes can pick up reasonable speed if on the road. On the cycle track going at anything above a crawl is potentially dangerous because of all the obstacles.

So since we're NOT legally obliged to cycle in the cycle track...

Edit: Found another photo online. This one gives an overview of the stretch of road downhill along Mobhi Road. You can see the bin and lamp post in the cycle lane (just ahead of the cyclist) that are shown in close up above, and further downhill is the yellow bus stop. DCC have been kind enough to put up a sign warning of the children who mill around the pavement/cycle track periodically.

And as someone has commented on flickr where I took these photos from, the entry (while cycling) to this cycle path is not obvious. So if you miss getting onto it at the top, then forget it; you're staying on the road (short of stopping your bike completely and hauling it across onto the cycle path).

Jhon_Alan · 17-06-2013 06:30PM

it was only proposed not happened!!

Chips Lovell · 17-06-2013 06:42PM

It's already been legislated for.

ROK ON · 17-06-2013 06:45PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Having lived and cycled in Dublin city centre for years now, I'm still amazed at how some people can claim the only way to cycle safely is by breaking road traffic laws, such as breaking lights or going the wrong way down a one way street.

Thats journalists for you;)

Tombo2001 · 18-06-2013 10:14AM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Having lived and cycled in Dublin city centre for years now, I'm still amazed at how some people can claim the only way to cycle safely is by breaking road traffic laws, such as breaking lights or going the wrong way down a one way street.

I'd be quite happy to point to instances where it is safer to break the rules.

That is quite different to saying that breaking the rules is generally safer.

Chips Lovell · 18-06-2013 10:19AM

I'll be specific, I've yet to encounter an instance.

Kav0777 · 18-06-2013 10:42AM

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I'd be quite happy to point to instances where it is safer to break the rules.

That is quite different to saying that breaking the rules is generally safer.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/a-virtuous-cyclist-for-one-day-only-1.1429056

Apparently, it's much more fun too....

buffalo · 18-06-2013 10:46AM

Today's piece is much more balanced and encouraging: http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/cycling-the-next-generation-1.1432167

galwaycyclist · 18-06-2013 10:49AM

buffalo wrote: »

Today's piece is much more balanced and encouraging: http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/cycling-the-next-generation-1.1432167

Agreed but they really could have chosen a better picture to illustrate cycling to school than some mini - Boba fett lookalike.

galwaycyclist · 18-06-2013 10:53AM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Having lived and cycled in Dublin city centre for years now, I'm still amazed at how some people can claim the only way to cycle safely is by breaking road traffic laws, such as breaking lights or going the wrong way down a one way street.

Maybe you need to get out beyond the canals from time to time?

Qualitymark · 18-06-2013 10:55AM

ConorGoodman wrote: »

As the person who commisioned the series (and a keen cyclist myself)

Would you think of doing a feature on the kind of facilities other cities have for cyclists, like Copenhagen http://john-s-allen.com/blog/?p=4710 and Amsterdam and so on http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/04/worlds-top-20-cycling-cities/5442/ (and comparison with Irish weather, which isn't really so different)?

Irish Times - Rag

Comments