Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Golflad
Posts: 32
Joined: 1 Aug 2017, 12:44pm

Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by Golflad »

I refer to Editor Dan Joyce and his latest editorial :- How dare you call my cycling nondescript? I am 76 years old and have ridden most of my life. Never been without a bicycle. Your reference to "Meat-and-potatoes"; "nondescript" I find most insulting. I do not need to circle on a calendar any of my rides:- they are all looked forward too and very much enjoyed. I take great pleasure in getting my bike out and cleaning it and of course riding it, be it Lands End - John O' Groats, Coast to Coast or my favourite short loop from home. You sir, should not belittle any bike ride.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by mjr »

Coo. What's he written now? Sounds like he may have got into a "meat and potatoes" sizing contest, which is probably ill advised unless he holds some World Record!
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by PH »

You can read it for yourself. Then maybe explain why anyone would get upset about it
https://www.cyclinguk.org/publication/c ... nuary-2021
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by thirdcrank »

PH wrote:You can read it for yourself. Then maybe explain why anyone would get upset about it
https://www.cyclinguk.org/publication/c ... nuary-2021


Thanks for the link. I read right through the editorial to see if I could offer an explanation, but my eyes began to glaze over. IMO drivel, but it's a free country, with a free press.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by mjr »

PH wrote:You can read it for yourself. Then maybe explain why anyone would get upset about it
https://www.cyclinguk.org/publication/c ... nuary-2021

Thanks for spotting that but urgh, issuu needs to die a firey death... it's a total accessibility disaster zone. I can only read it by picking full screen and zooming in. What the heck is wrong with PDFs? At least the reading tools work on them. Anyway...

I guess the offending bit is the attached penultimate and final paragraph, suggesting that cycling for exercise or fresh air is boring, something to endure rather than look forward to, possibly implying that it's only epic tours and challenge rides of the sorts advertised in Cycle or sold by CTC Touring that are notable. I think I might be upset by that if I was a member - but I already know from long experience that CUK isn't currently for everyday cyclists like me.
Attachments
Editorial Brain Fart
Editorial Brain Fart
Screenshot from 2020-12-04 16-16-58.png (14.72 KiB) Viewed 1713 times
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by Cyril Haearn »

'What you (gazette editor) think of me is none of my business'

I agree with the OP, quite unnecessary. Has the editor upset others? Do some people think he is good?

Remember Tim Hughes?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by Jdsk »

What do those who are offended think that nondescript means?

Thanks

Jonathan
Rod Goodfellow
Posts: 93
Joined: 22 Aug 2017, 12:02pm

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by Rod Goodfellow »

Why bother unpacking the magazine? Just put it in the recycling without wasting time on it.
geocycle
Posts: 2177
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 9:46am

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by geocycle »

Rod Goodfellow wrote:Why bother unpacking the magazine? Just put it in the recycling without wasting time on it.


I enjoyed the article about Malham. I’m not very interested in the campaigns but it better reflects my cycling than most magazines.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by thirdcrank »

Jdsk wrote:What do those who are offended think that nondescript means? ...


I'm not offended but this seems reasonable
ADJECTIVE

lacking distinctive or interesting features or characteristics.
"she lived in a nondescript suburban apartment block"

synonyms:

undistinguished · featureless · characterless · unremarkable · unexceptional · unmemorable · blending into the background · ordinary · commonplace · average · mediocre · run-of-the-mill · mundane · uninteresting · boring · uninspiring · dull · colourless · grey · anaemic · insipid · bland · bog-standard · common or garden


I can see the OP might take issue with Dan the Editor Man being judgmental about his taking pleasure from every bike ride.
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by Jdsk »

Thanks... but I wasn't quite asking that...

Perhaps I should have said: "What do those who are offended understand by nondescript?".

Jonathan
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by PH »

Rod Goodfellow wrote:Why bother unpacking the magazine? Just put it in the recycling without wasting time on it.

Well, don't bother? You don't have to have it, you can say so on the website.
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by PH »

thirdcrank wrote:I can see the OP might take issue with Dan the Editor Man being judgmental about his taking pleasure from every bike ride.

Well, it says "A way to spend the time that's pleasant" so I'm not sure that judgment is being made.
I think some people are looking to find fault, or too easily offended. The editorial was IMO just a little bland, even with the explanations I'm at a loss to understand why anyone got upset about it.
I take some pleasure in all my riding, I wouldn't do it otherwise, I even enjoy the mundane work stuff which if often most of my miles. But I'm jealous of anyone that gets the same pleasure from their local lanes as a big event or tour. I think the editorial sums that up fine... Anyway, sun's shining, I'm off for some meat and potato riding.
tatanab
Posts: 5033
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by tatanab »

Slightly differently, I was rather put out by a comment from our CEO whose cycling experience seems limited to London. She wrote that CUK is unique in being inclusive and open to all abilities - something like that, I'm not going to rummage in the recycling for the exact words. Unique my eye! I guess she knows nothing of other national clubs that meet those criteria -but of course they are clubs not charities so probably don't count.

By the way - she really should get some mudguards for commuting those mean London streets.
geocycle
Posts: 2177
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 9:46am

Re: Editorial in the current edition. Dec/Jan

Post by geocycle »

Having reread the article I cannot understand why anyone could take offence. I do nondescript rides most days and enjoy them all, if I didn’t I’d not bother. However, it is the weekend rides or better still the multi day tours that stick in the memory.
Post Reply