Boardman getting slated..in the Torygraph

[al_yrpal]

http://bit.ly/1oanvWi

[beardy]

Cycling may not be dangerous enough to need a helmet but he might need one now for sticking his head over the parapet and saying that the King has no clothes on.

[al_yrpal]

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/campai ... reakfast-0

Reply from Chris

Al

[Spinners]

And an eloquent reply too! Well done Chris.

[bovlomov]

Angry viewers took to Facebook to complain...

This is how journalism is done these days: reprinting the raging, ill-informed, improvised drivel spouted by people on the internet. And calling it NEWS.

Well done Daily Telegraph!

[fatboy]

Angry viewers took to Facebook to complain...

This is how journalism is done these days: reprinting the raging, ill-informed, improvised drivel spouted by people on the internet. And calling it NEWS.

Well done Daily Telegraph!

+1

[TonyR]

I've given up reading the papers. There is no news in them these days, just journalists' hobby horses and vox twitterati.

[Richard Fairhurst]

The Telegraph's cycling coverage is embarrassingly bad. Their "recreational cycling" section is filed under "Men > Active" (because only men ride bikes, right?). It is largely helmed by their business news editor, who unsurprisingly seems to subscribe to the "cycling is the new golf" theory - a MAMILly, fitness-heavy approach that doesn't have much time for people actually, you know, using their bikes to get places.

Then there was the recent sorry episode where he managed to get a well-known cycling journalist suspended from Twitter for a perceived "death threat", since when he's been bleating on about "trolls" constantly.

I don't have much time for either of their politics, but the Times does cycling so much better than the Telegraph does.

[mrjemm]

I don't read either of the aforementioned T titles, but know and work with folk who read the Telegraph, and the common threads in their perception of cycling suggest an unpleasant influence. Obviously this could be turned around to the folk with such opinions read such a paper rather than the paper forming said opinions, but really it's much of a muchness when the media and it's audience are a fairly closed environment.

I tend to read the G (obviously, I am sure many of you will accept), and note that rather than one viewpoint, it is a sounding board for numerous writers/correspondents, who often hold opposing views. I have no reason to doubt that this occurs in most media, and that would include the Telegraph (though I doubt the Mail, with it's apparently highly editor led stance, ugh), but clearly there are common tendencies amongst those getting published, and perhaps the editorial staff have an influence that is shall we say, diverse to the typical CTC forum poster's stance.

i.e. Telegraph = Conservative = Big business.
Bicycling = Small business = Potentially anti Big business.
Them and us. Liberty vs Libertarian.

[TonyR]

Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: the Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; the The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.

A Conflict of Interest: Yes Prime Minister

[squeaker]

Allegedly Wednesday's Breakfast is 'doing' helmets

[al_yrpal]

BBC take on safety.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29878233

Al

[AlaninWales]

Nicely worded response to another attack on Boardman http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/headways-brick-wall/

[Thermostat9]

Allegedly Wednesday's Breakfast is 'doing' helmets

Or - Louise goes on a helmeted bicycle ride to ask 'opinions' from baffled people in the street about wearing helmets. Then in the studio the guests will be a shorts wearing weird-beard chosen as the non-helmet wearer (mostly because it doesn't suit his 1912 Dursley Pederson) and a harridan from BRAKE, wearing a t-shirt saying where she is from but hasn't got over her childs death while being a passenger in a crash involving a drunk teenager 10 years ago and thinks her 'campaigning' will help 'if it saves one persons life'. The filmed item and the studio discussion will be scrupulously 'balanced' and no-one will be allowed to make a factual based point without a fatuous 'right to reply' from someone whose opinion is based on wilful ignorance and pitiful bigotry.

[Psamathe]

Allegedly Wednesday's Breakfast is 'doing' helmets ... The filmed item and the studio discussion will be scrupulously 'balanced' and no-one will be allowed to make a factual based point without a fatuous 'right to reply' from someone whose opinion is based on wilful ignorance and pitiful bigotry.

The BBc is famous for its "false balance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_balance). They seem to do it all the time and are continually criticised for it. I think they hit a particularly bad point with the recent debates about climate change. Maybe the "helmet issue" whilst probably not drawing the same audiences, will demonstrate the failing again.

Ian