Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Journalism and cycling

24567199

Comments

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,156 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    a motorist breaking a red is not dangerous to a cyclist breaking the same red; but at many (most?) junctions, the motorist breaking the red is dangerous to those driving through a green light, rather than other road users breaking a red.


  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Look, the red light/green green light laws could not be clearer. Stop on red go on green. There is no satisfactory explanation for anyone on any mode of transport who decides to break a red light. Level of risk depending on what mode you are using is not a factor...ever.


  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Well, typical day, today I was crossing the street, wheeling my bicycle, in Rathmines. The pedestrian light was flashing amber, giving me right of way.

    Does a flashing amber give a pedestrian right of way at a pedestrian crossing? I would have thought so at a zebra crossing but not a pedestrian crossing.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I love the way the thread has proved its own point. Here we are talking about cyclists breaking red lights again.

    As accurately observed above, imagine if ANY conversation about cars / investment in roads was immediately hijacked by people going on about speeding all the time. Absurd.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,504 ✭✭✭NiallBoo


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Does a flashing amber give a pedestrian right of way at a pedestrian crossing? I would have thought so at a zebra crossing but not a pedestrian crossing.

    Flashing amber means that a motorist/cyclist may proceed only if the crossing is clear.

    The pedestrian still has right-of-way until it becomes a red man on the pedestrian crossing.

    I suppose you could say that the crossing is essentially a zebra-crossing while it's flashing amber.

    Although zebra crossings are different to light-controlled crossings.


  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭Roadhawk


    Deedsie wrote: »
    I agree, cyclists defending this is ridiculous. The same for cycling on a one way street. It doesn't matter what the rules are in different countries. Respect the laws of the country you are in.

    Dont break red lights. Its not that complicated.

    Exactly, its quite simple but must apply for all modes of transport. Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,504 ✭✭✭NiallBoo


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.
    ...It's every bit as blatant. In spite of what people might tell themselves about it supposedly not harming anyone, they know damn well they're breaking the red.


  • Site Banned Posts: 20,686 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    I love the way the thread has proved its own point. Here we are talking about cyclists breaking red lights again.

    As accurately observed above, imagine if ANY conversation about cars / investment in roads was immediately hijacked by people going on about speeding all the time. Absurd.

    Ive often thought about starting such absurd topics in the motoring threads and whatnot.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Exactly, its quite simple but must apply for all modes of transport. Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.

    How is it not? You are just making excuses now.

    I thought you were serious about road safety, with all your 'red lights are not confusing' talk. Clearly not.


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 20,686 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Exactly, its quite simple but must apply for all modes of transport. Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.

    Oh wow, this is up there with the stupidest things on here. You say yourself it's illegal, so yes, yes it is.

    From the cyclist point of view jumping early may be because they don't trust the car behind them in the lane to have any patience and squeeze by (I get this everyday), but of course they might just be an arse thinking the light is nothing but an inconvenience to them. In some, some cases I'd understand it, but don't do it.

    From the driving point of view, it seems to be ah sure I'll gamble, save a minute or so, my journey is terribly important. In no cases except medical emergency to I understand it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    If someone hurts themselves cycling on a mountain trail. Someone is sure to make red light breaking somehow related. Any comment arguing otherwise derided as defending red light breaking.

    The issue is not defending red light breaking. It's the misrepresentation of opinion usually flawed and unresearched as fact. Especially by the media.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,095 ✭✭✭buffalo


    i threw that in as a comment on the article for you.

    You did? Under which name?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,413 ✭✭✭✭Trojan


    I sent in a letter to the IT similar to some of the posts mentioned above.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,767 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    Is it just me, or does this......
    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Look, the red light/green green light laws could not be clearer. Stop on red go on green.There is no satisfactory explanation for anyone on any mode of transport who decides to break a red light. Level of risk depending on what mode you are using is not a factor...ever.

    contradict this?
    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Exactly, its quite simple but must apply for all modes of transport. Im fully aware that some cars will squeeze an amber or early red (which is still illegal) however it not as blatant as a deliberate act to jump the lights at any stage.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    No excuse for poor journalism either.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,632 ✭✭✭the.red.baron


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    Is it just me, or does this......



    contradict this?

    I'd say it's just you


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭greenspurs


    the usual "Going around in Circles" arguments have started ...
    ...... unfollow.....

    "Bright lights and Thunder .................... " #NoPopcorn



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    greenspurs wrote: »
    the usual "Going around in Circles" arguments have started ...
    ...... unfollow.....

    It's a vicious cycle...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,632 ✭✭✭the.red.baron


    beauf wrote: »
    It's a vicious cycle...

    Now cyclists and roundabouts, that would make a good liveline topic...sure....sure....sure....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Everyone would want to get their spoke in.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭Veloce150


    NiallBoo wrote:
    The pedestrian still has right-of-way until it becomes a red man on the pedestrian crossing.
    I suppose you could say that the crossing is essentially a zebra-crossing while it's flashing amber.

    Flashing amber (facing the pedestrian) means don't start crossing.

    Once a pedestrian is crossing, they have right of way even if the lights change to 'red-man'. Motorists and cyclists must always give way to pedestrians once they are crossing. It does not matter if the pedestrian has ignored a 'red-man' or starts crossing on flashing amber. You're not allowed endanger or injure them & if you do, you'll be liable. Jay-waliking is a matter for the Gardai.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,767 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    I'd say it's just you

    Apparently not :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    Look, the red light/green green light laws could not be clearer. Stop on red go on green. There is no satisfactory explanation for anyone on any mode of transport who decides to break a red light. Level of risk depending on what mode you are using is not a factor...ever.

    well considering you just got them wrong maybe they could...

    Go on green only if safe to do so


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,413 ✭✭✭✭Trojan


    And you can go on red if it's road works and you can still see the back of the car in front of you.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,413 ✭✭✭✭Trojan




  • Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭AlreadyHome


    Trojan wrote: »
    Nicely done by Brian, Peter and Joan. I didn't make the cut :)

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/cyclists-and-safer-infrastructure-1.2816419

    Delighted! Although unfortunately don't have a subscription so will have to take your word for it...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,413 ✭✭✭✭Trojan


    Delighted! Although unfortunately don't have a subscription so will have to take your word for it...

    Right-click the link and open in a private window (removes the cookies so you can view it).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Veloce150 wrote: »
    Flashing amber (facing the pedestrian) means don't start crossing.

    Once a pedestrian is crossing, they have right of way even if the lights change to 'red-man'. Motorists and cyclists must always give way to pedestrians once they are crossing. It does not matter if the pedestrian has ignored a 'red-man' or starts crossing on flashing amber. You're not allowed endanger or injure them & if you do, you'll be liable. Jay-waliking is a matter for the Gardai.

    Could you give a source for that? I've always understood a flashing amber (when driving, cycling or walking) to mean "proceed with caution".

    Great letters in the times. Keep 'em coming; there's bound to be a lot of little motorists bouncing up and replying "But… red lights…" in the next few days. Might be worth mentioning Paris and other places that allow cyclists to proceed through red lights when safe.

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/livable-city/la-oe-babin-bicycle-laws-20161003-snap-story.html

    And one tweeter had a great analogy: 'It's like covering an assault on a pensioner by saying "Yebbut old people can be annoying!"'

    I see today's story on cycling in The Irish Times is

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/car-ban-on-parts-of-liffey-quays-mooted-in-cycle-path-plan-1.2816621
    Car ban on parts of Liffey Quays mooted in cycle path plan
    Dublin City Council proposing ban on private cars and lorries from Ellis and Arran Quays

    including
    Dublin City Council chief executive Owen Keegan in June 2014 had said the proposed Liffey cycle route would reduce the space for general traffic on the north quays from two lanes to one. This was met with opposition from some motorists and city centre retailers who said it would worsen daily gridlock along the quays, particularly during morning rush hour.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Incicentally, I'm disappointed to see the Dublin Cycling Campaign posting a comment on the article with the silly statement that imagines all cyclists as a single group, "There is no doubt that poorly behaved cyclists give us all a bad name."
    This is a concept that should be stamped out, and an unscientific and stupid way of thinking.
    Poorly behaved cyclists give themselves a bad name, not me. Poorly behaved drivers, too.
    (On the other hand, the commenter does point out that cycling means better health. Perhaps the next and subsequent protest cycles should also stop at the Department of Health.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,767 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    Trojan wrote: »
    Nicely done by Brian, Peter and Joan. I didn't make the cut :)

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/cyclists-and-safer-infrastructure-1.2816419

    JD Mangan, on the other hand, believes motorists pay this mysterious "road tax" and makes the inexplicable link between insurance and infrastructure, overlooking of course that 22,000 cyclists have voluntary insurance through Cycling Ireland and that there's 100,000 (a figure that's likely to rise given the urgent state of the insurance market) uninsured drivers on our roads.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,971 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    JD Mangan, on the other hand, believes motorists pay this mysterious "road tax" and makes the inexplicable link between insurance and infrastructure, overlooking of course that 22,000 cyclists have voluntary insurance through Cycling Ireland and that there's 100,000 (a figure that's likely to rise given the urgent state of the insurance market) uninsured drivers on our roads.

    And the cyclists who also own vehicles which require "road tax"


  • Site Banned Posts: 20,686 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Mangan is a regular contributor to the letters page and is possibly the author of this book. Occasional ranting, occasional unsubstantiated, paranoid ramblings that make for good letters to the editor.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/J.-D.-Mangan/e/B0055DVH72

    Chip and shoulder come to mind


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,156 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Trojan wrote: »
    Nicely done by Brian, Peter and Joan. I didn't make the cut :)

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/cyclists-and-safer-infrastructure-1.2816419
    is Joan a boardsie?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,192 ✭✭✭Fian




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Fian wrote: »

    Ah, this writer is the equivalent of the 19th-century 'Man in the Street' controversialist in penny-dreadful papers.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,156 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Fian wrote: »
    at least the comments are leaning in the right direction.


  • Site Banned Posts: 20,686 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Fian wrote: »

    Rag of a paper anyway owned by a man with less than honest motives and an insalubrious past and staffed by ars3h0les.

    It's the paper that gives Barry Egan columns. That alone is enough to boycott it, even with out Ian O'Doherty and his really poorly written crap.

    I know a few journalists, across different organisations. They all take an amount of pride in their work and put a lot of hours into it and the research. Stuff like this must make them weep


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,998 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    Fian wrote: »

    I think this person fancies himself as the "Jeremy Clarkson" of the Indo.... Massive fail there!


  • Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭AlreadyHome


    at least the comments are leaning in the right direction.

    You're right...I wonder is this all a result of boardsie chat or if perhaps the cycling protest might have brought some previously silent individuals out of the woodwork.

    I quote my own response only to highlight what I've been thinking about lately in terms of the significance of the bicycle as an invention in and of itself. It's easy to forget that we really haven't made many significant changes to a machine introduced in the late 19th century:

    Without even getting into what a poorly argued piece this is, the author is woefully misinformed about simple issues like the oft-quoted, non-existent "road tax". All of our taxes pay for road infrastructure. There is no road specific tax. There is a motor tax: "...the tax rates are based on the carbon dioxide emissions of the car while in operation" Once the penny drops on this one, I'm sure we'll hear the author moaning about how much CO2 those ruddy cyclists are huffing all over his streets.

    Moving on from that minor detail...

    The political significance of cycling, as mentioned, cannot be understated. As women's rights and anti-slavery advocate Susan B. Anthony stated in 1896: "Let me tell you what I think of bicycling. I think it has done more to emancipate women than anything else in the world."

    Let us add to that how effectively the bicycle levels the playing field when it comes to transport for the less well off. In Dublin, one can pay off the cost of a decent bike in the space of 2 months of not using public transport 5 days a week.

    What about people who don't want to cycle everywhere? Well, they might well be covered by the remaining 90% of the budget. I know it's only the dregs, but it's something at least.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Weepsie wrote: »
    Rag of a paper anyway owned by a man with less than honest motives and an insalubrious past and staffed by ars3h0les.

    It's the paper that gives Barry Egan columns. That alone is enough to boycott it, even with out Ian O'Doherty and his really poorly written crap.

    I know a few journalists, across different t organisations. They all take an amount of pride in their work and put a lot of hours into it and the research. Stuff like this must make them weep

    +1

    If they want to know why newspapers can't make money its this drivel.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    The entire point of opinion pieces by writers such as O'Doherty, Kevin Myers, Clarkson etc. is to be provocative and get people riled up.

    If you clicked on it, read it, and got angry, then they've done they're job and the Indo makes its money.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Another Cycling segment coming up on Pat Kenny on Newstalk now. They already had one this morning, and you can imagine the tone when he mentioned earlier they were going to talk about license plates for cyclists.

    Edit: Whoop Whoop! It's Ian O'Doherty discussing it!


  • Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭AlreadyHome


    The entire point opinion pieces by writers such as O'Doherty, Kevin Myers, Clarkson etc. is to be provocative and get people riled up.

    If clicked on, read it, and got angry, then they've done they're job and the Indo makes its money.

    You're absolutely right, but I'd argue there's something positive about seeing the majority of responses coming from cyclists. The more coverage the cycling debate gets, the better. Take that Irish Times piece, for example. Pro-cyclist letter responses outnumbered the car driver's response 3 to 1.


  • Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭AlreadyHome


    "I'd be more concerned about being injured by a cyclist in Dublin, than I would be of being injured by a car"

    Ian O'Doherty trumps your statistics with his +5 mouth noise.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    He can be full of ****e on most topics. After having to listen to him I'm sure he's a regular on the various cyclist threads, it was like he was playing bingo with all the cliches he trotted out, motorists pay tax, dangerous cyclists etc etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,709 ✭✭✭Tombo2001


    The thing about being a cyclist for me anyway is.....

    They all hate us anyway....

    ......why should we care what they think.

    Absolutely no doubt that newspapers/ media have fostered and encouraged this friction between motorists and cyclists.

    I've lost count of the amount of letters and articles I've seen in the Irish Times complaining about cyclists; mostly written by people who haven't been on a bike this century.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,800 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Pat Kenny seems to have a few hobby horses. Rather into spirtualist healing flim-flam too, very sympathetic to guests who operate in that area, and is clearly dismissive of climate change too.

    I'm not a regular listener, so perhaps I'm being unfair, but I've heard him show these traits enough to avoid him.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,709 ✭✭✭Tombo2001


    ThisRegard wrote: »
    Another Cycling segment coming up on Pat Kenny on Newstalk now. They already had one this morning, and you can imagine the tone when he mentioned earlier they were going to talk about license plates for cyclists.

    Edit: Whoop Whoop! It's Ian O'Doherty discussing it!

    Nothin personal against Ian O'Doherty.

    Opinion journalism is what he does.

    The issue here is Newstalk....

    ......we are running an opinion section on cyclists. Lets invite this person in who will really put the boot into cyclists......

    The station has the agenda. It will claim to be objective and neutral of course.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    I'm no chicken myself, but I'm amazed at how many of the radio gurus are from my generation. Are there no fit young cyclists who'd be good radio jocks?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 718 ✭✭✭gaffmaster


    I think an awful lot of bad or lazy journalism stems from the journalist having to write about something they know little about. So they regurgitate the loudest or most recent piece of information they've heard on the topic in their own words. In the case highlighted very well by the OP, it's the fact that some people on bicycles break red lights sometimes.

    Trends develop. You see this type of thing all the time when football pundits are asked about certain topics. One of them will form an opinion, then the rest will copy it until it's a fact. A lot of the time it's nonsense.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement