Do newspapers use Clickbait on purpose?

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
gxaustin
Posts: 624
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 12:07pm

Re: Do newspapers use Clickbait on purpose?

Postby gxaustin » 22 Aug 2018, 3:04pm

But I was once stopped by West Merci Police because I was driving slowly, maybe 22 when max 30 was allowed.

I think I should be proud of this. Any comments?


I was stopped by the Italian police. No problems - just wanted to look at my Morgan :lol:

Maybe these guys wanted a look at your Trojan?

(more a jape than a comment)

David9694
Posts: 667
Joined: 10 Feb 2018, 8:42am

Re: Do newspapers use Clickbait on purpose?

Postby David9694 » 23 Aug 2018, 3:57pm

I think a car going unusually slowly for the conditions can be grounds for police concern. Sure, they might be looking for an address or something, but I get stuck behind cars just occasionally where I really do question the driver’s competence or sober-ness. On a bike, you still have to be wary and give a wide berth as these people are likely to do something entirely unpredictable/random, albeit usually in slow motion.

Back to the OP, this isn’t clickbait as such, as I understand it - clickbait is the nonsense below an article headlined “you won’t believe what this 1980s movie star looks like today” and “people who ate potatoes between 1972 and 2003 should read this”. This article has some after it - I can’t believe anyone gets drawn in, yet they still keep churning it out with very little variation: words like “you could be eligible for a massive payout” have an enduring appeal, it seems.

There’s also some reader comments.

Presumably the rush hour bike banners simply want you to disappear completely as a person: clearly not to cycle to work, nor sit at home (claiming benefits?) just disappear?

Yes, there are times when I’d like the roads all to myself as well. If you ban me from my bike, I’ll just add another car into the mix, and then we’ll all be better off.

Overtaking the same cyclists a dozen times - oh dear - all those £0000s gone on what turns out to be an illusion of speed.

And I thought we all rode on the pavements already??

On the plus side of all this, it’s useful to know what attitudes you’re up against on our crowded roads (which in the backs of our minds we’re sure never used to be this bad).

I only get to see the Daily Mail either when I’m waiting for fish & chips, or visiting my mother. Most of it is just plain boring lIMHO. I don’t frequent the website generally either - but it’s always nice to know that some girls have passed their exams.

While I’m on my soap box, did anyone see “And another thing...” in the Metro on 18/8/18? - “why (oh why) do cyclists wear black, etc??“ My wife hacks her horse on country roads and she agrees with/practises the hi-viz argument, especially when we come across country folk riding a dark brown horse (a bay in horse parlance), wearing dark brown. Therefore I was banned from posting a response to the Metro. So what I wanted to say in response to poster OJW, or whoever was:

“There are drivers who are looking all of the time and will see you, those looking none of the time, who will kill you and those looking some of the time where hi viz/reflective gear might make a difference - which one are you, OJW??”