Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 11798
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: Think Cheddar and Cider
Contact:

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by al_yrpal »

I read all the headlines every morning via BBC News. It amazes me that folk cant read and be unaffected by 'newspapers' that dont reflect their own personal POV. Then there are rags like the Guardian that falsely claim independence but actually arent.

I always have a look at the Daily Stars front page that gives one a giggle to start the day.

Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
Jdsk
Posts: 26214
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by Jdsk »

Is it time for THE SONG?

Jonathan
Jdsk
Posts: 26214
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by Jdsk »

The Guardian's coverage of cycling is *way ahead of that of any other newspaper:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/cycling

Jonathan

* Unless you're actually looking for hatred.
Last edited by Jdsk on 19 May 2024, 4:14pm, edited 1 time in total.
briansnail
Posts: 917
Joined: 1 Sep 2019, 3:07pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by briansnail »

Like all of us journalists have children and husbands and wives to feed.

The headlines.One day cyclists at the front saving the planet and mankind from extinction.The next month those lunatic reckless cyclists hell bent on massacres of peaceful pedestrians.

Its not cyclists its anything that sells newspapers.

Newspapers and MP'S (except Lord Arbuthnot) will firmly closely ears to eg the Post office scandal and settle for vocal on the minor.
******************************************
I ride Brompton,Hetchins 531
Jdsk
Posts: 26214
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by Jdsk »

briansnail wrote: 19 May 2024, 3:44pm ...
The headlines.One day cyclists at the front saving the planet and mankind from extinction.The next month those lunatic reckless cyclists hell bent on massacres of peaceful pedestrians.
...
What do you think of the Guardian's coverage? There's a link in the post immediately before yours.

Thanks

Jonathan
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20475
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by mjr »

cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 8:49am Indeed, but before we do, we must recognise to an extent that due to a percentage of bike riders, we as a group have brought this upon ourselves.
There is a minority who will place the speed of their own cycle journey above the safety of others, whether its not respecting zebra crossings or cycling too fast along shared walk and cycle ways, or even failure to respond to road traffic commands like give way or stop (it is [...]
Collective punishment! I can no more stop the minority of criminal cyclists than I can stop the criminal drivers. Why should I be lambasted for the crimes of one but not the other?
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.
reohn2
Posts: 45536
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by reohn2 »

mjr wrote: 19 May 2024, 4:47pm
cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 8:49am Indeed, but before we do, we must recognise to an extent that due to a percentage of bike riders, we as a group have brought this upon ourselves.
There is a minority who will place the speed of their own cycle journey above the safety of others, whether its not respecting zebra crossings or cycling too fast along shared walk and cycle ways, or even failure to respond to road traffic commands like give way or stop (it is [...]
Collective punishment! I can no more stop the minority of criminal cyclists than I can stop the criminal drivers. Why should I be lambasted for the crimes of one but not the other?
Because you're a member of an "out group".
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
853
Posts: 324
Joined: 23 Sep 2022, 6:01pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by 853 »

toontra wrote: 19 May 2024, 2:03pm Personally I won't read it - including online. It's a bile-filled comic and not worthy of serious comment (from what I hear :wink: ). As mentioned above, the Telegraph and Express aren't much better these days. Sad times.
Unfortunately I do read it, to find out what my elderly relative who buys it is on about. I'm not allowed to use the correct words to describe how bad it is, due to forum rules, but I would describe it as vindictive journalism designed to stir up hatred.

Here is a screen shot of part of the Guardian article that Jdsk linked to below. In the Daily Mail 'coverage', it didn't mention that Mrs Griffiths stepped out in front of the cyclist, or that an eyewitness testified it had not been the cyclist's fault. It tried to pin all on the blame on the cyclist. As I said above vindictive journalism designed to stir up hatred.

Guardian.jpg
Jdsk wrote: 19 May 2024, 2:55pm The Guardian's coverage of cycling is *way ahead of that of any other newspaper:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/cycling

Jonathan

* Unless you're actually looking for hatred.
cycle tramp
Posts: 3848
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by cycle tramp »

mjr wrote: 19 May 2024, 4:47pm
cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 8:49am Indeed, but before we do, we must recognise to an extent that due to a percentage of bike riders, we as a group have brought this upon ourselves.
There is a minority who will place the speed of their own cycle journey above the safety of others, whether its not respecting zebra crossings or cycling too fast along shared walk and cycle ways, or even failure to respond to road traffic commands like give way or stop (it is [...]
Collective punishment! I can no more stop the minority of criminal cyclists than I can stop the criminal drivers. Why should I be lambasted for the crimes of one but not the other?
Terry Pratchett once wrote 'bad things [tragedies] happen not because people say 'Yes' but because people don't say 'No' and events unfold from that point onwards.
Did I know that fixed wheel bicycles were being used illegally on the roads? Yes, of course I did. Did I write to condemn there use, ask the riders to reconsider.. no. Did i know that cyclists were riding around that Park, at speeds above the recommended limit, as packs? No, but I suspect it was known. Was it condemned in the cycling press, was it mentioned anywhere.... I mean for £#×&'s sake what did we think was going to eventually happen? How many times are the diced rolled before a double one is thrown? But we didn't say anything, and stayed remarkably silent. Even now when this bill is being discussed is there a single voice from any of the cycling media asking us to just give strava a rest - to work on our road craft and consideration for others? We have failed to police ourselves and as a result someone is going to do that for us.
Perhaps I should be lambasted, for not saying 'this is not right,' louder and clearer, enough.
Not being a racist, and not being a sexist, doesn't stop at not sharing inappropriate jokes, it starts with ensuring that everyone is treated equally and has the same opportunities, and raising a complaint in those situations where people are denied this.
Perhaps its time that being a considerate bicycle rider starts with policing ourselves to protect that freedom which we still enjoy.
Obtaing a more comfortable riding position https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/how- ... p-bar-bike
User avatar
853
Posts: 324
Joined: 23 Sep 2022, 6:01pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by 853 »

cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 9:19pm Terry Pratchett once wrote 'bad things [tragedies] happen not because people say 'Yes' but because people don't say 'No' and events unfold from that point onwards.
Did I know that fixed wheel bicycles were being used illegally on the roads? Yes, of course I did. Did I write to condemn there use, ask the riders to reconsider.. no. Did i know that cyclists were riding around that Park, at speeds above the recommended limit, as packs? No, but I suspect it was known. Was it condemned in the cycling press, was it mentioned anywhere.... I mean for £#×&'s sake what did we think was going to eventually happen? How many times are the diced rolled before a double one is thrown? But we didn't say anything, and stayed remarkably silent. Even now when this bill is being discussed is there a single voice from any of the cycling media asking us to just give strava a rest - to work on our road craft and consideration for others? We have failed to police ourselves and as a result someone is going to do that for us.
Perhaps I should be lambasted, for not saying 'this is not right,' louder and clearer, enough.
Not being a racist, and not being a sexist, doesn't stop at not sharing inappropriate jokes, it starts with ensuring that everyone is treated equally and has the same opportunities, and raising a complaint in those situations where people are denied this.
Perhaps its time that being a considerate bicycle rider starts with policing ourselves to protect that freedom which we still enjoy.
Er, I think you're on the wrong thread.

This is the Daily Mail Vs Cyclist : What's at stake? thread, started by the OP to discuss what they called their "vendetta against the cyclist"
cycle tramp
Posts: 3848
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by cycle tramp »

853 wrote: 20 May 2024, 6:48pm
cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 9:19pm Terry Pratchett once wrote 'bad things [tragedies] happen not because people say 'Yes' but because people don't say 'No' and events unfold from that point onwards.

Perhaps I should be lambasted, for not saying 'this is not right,' louder and clearer, enough.
Er, I think you're on the wrong thread.

This is the Daily Mail Vs Cyclist : What's at stake? thread, started by the OP to discuss what they called their "vendetta against the cyclist"
Or the wrong universe or dimensions or whatever :-)
The above was my response to why perhaps I should be lambasted for the way other cyclists behave..

Here's another question, am I racist? I like to think I'm not. But if I'm not why did it take another person to point out that all the good guys in Lord of the rings were white? If I wasn't a racist why didn't I pick up on this earlier?
Obtaing a more comfortable riding position https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/how- ... p-bar-bike
drossall
Posts: 6181
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by drossall »

francovendee wrote: 17 May 2024, 4:03pm As a cyclist, and definitely not right wing, I can see why other road users and pedestrians get annoyed.
In London many cyclists ignore people using zebra crossings and go through a red lights. In reality most obey the rules and ride safely but the ones that don't give cyclists a bad name.
I'm not anti cyclists but stopping these loons who are intent on beating their best commute time is needed.
If they want to race save it for the weekend away from crowds.
I try to take a balanced view of this. I'm not sure I see it so clearly as do you.

For a start, the law says stop on amber, not red, at least if it's safe to do so. It is motorists who have ignored that to the extent that lots of people don't even know the law, and it would probably be unsafe for cyclists to obey it in many circumstances, for fear of being hit from behind. Secondly, most cyclists are motorists, so the argument that cyclists are less responsible than motorists is a bit like the argument that rugby players are less responsible than men; it doesn't really make sense at an ontological level.

Frankly I think that motorist offences, such as jumping amber lights and then the last few cars going through on red, parking offences, speeding, and so on, have become so accepted that no-one notices them. Then there's confirmation bias - if you're looking for evidence that one group commit offences, you'll find it, and you won't notice evidence that others do too. I regularly sit with other cyclists at red lights, for example.

None of this is to say that cyclist behaviour can't improve. I'm not even sure I'd want to claim that cyclists behave better than motorists. There's incentive to obey the rules if you know you're going to come off second in any collision, to set against the frequent claim that there's less chance of being stopped when you're on a bike.

And, if cyclists are just motorists on bikes for the day, and motorists don't think cyclists are proper road users, why would those self-same motorists start behaving like proper users when on two wheels?
francovendee
Posts: 3245
Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by francovendee »

Never for a moment have I or would I say motorists obey the rules, many don't. What I refer to is the deliberately dangerous behaviour of some cyclists in cities.
Some years back i heard a group of friends chatting on a train, presumably after a night out. The discussion was about their best times for their cycling commute.
Nothing wrong until one was asked if he'd fully recovered after getting knocked down going through a red light.
It was the casual way this seemed to be assumed as OK and clearly something they all did.
Having had my brother in law hospitalised by a bike ignoring him on the crossing I think some cyclists, just as some motorists, give the rest a bad name and fodder for rags like the Daily Mail.
drossall
Posts: 6181
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by drossall »

Oh of course. There are some in every group. What I was questioning was the idea that cyclists are bad and motorists are good which, as I said, is a bit like saying that rugby players are bad and men are good; it doesn't really make ontological sense!
mattheus
Posts: 5308
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Daily Mail Vs The Cyclist : What's at stake?

Post by mattheus »

cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 9:19pm
mjr wrote: 19 May 2024, 4:47pm
cycle tramp wrote: 19 May 2024, 8:49am Indeed, but before we do, we must recognise to an extent that due to a percentage of bike riders, we as a group have brought this upon ourselves.
There is a minority who will place the speed of their own cycle journey above the safety of others, whether its not respecting zebra crossings or cycling too fast along shared walk and cycle ways, or even failure to respond to road traffic commands like give way or stop (it is [...]
Collective punishment! I can no more stop the minority of criminal cyclists than I can stop the criminal drivers. Why should I be lambasted for the crimes of one but not the other?
<snip> Even now when this bill is being discussed is there a single voice from any of the cycling media asking us to just give strava a rest - to work on our road craft and consideration for others? We have failed to police ourselves and as a result someone is going to do that for us.
mjr is right on this one. There IS NO COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBLITY. Why should "we police ourselves"? Your bold text sounds like endorsement of vigilante action.

Imagine saying similar things about young black males commiting knife crime. Should all young black males be responsible? How about we round a few up and search them on a regular basis?
Post Reply