BBC TV Program on Danger of Cyclists

zanes

Having commuted every day by bike for two years, and going for road rides every weekend this year I feel I must be doing something wrong.... In those two and a half years I've had one "memorable" run in- 50% my fault, 1 car involved crash-my fault and a handful of times where cars have pulled out/overtaken too close. :?

oscarbudgie

Simon E wrote:

oscarbudgie wrote:

Perhaps we do need to get 'our' house in order?

No, my house is fine.

There are miscreants in all walks of life. Do you suggest all peds get their house in order when one iPod-wearing idiot jaywalks in your path? Do all car drivers need to go back to driving school because a boy-racer screeches around the streets or an OAP gets clocked by a Gatso? No.

I condemn pavement cycling, RLJing and so on. Anyone who does it is breaking the law. People who break the law are not my responsibility, even though as a cyclist I resent being tarred with the same brush by people in the media, erroneously termed 'journalists', who haven't anything better to do. I also resent the premise of the programme that cyclists collectively have a case to answer for the actions of a small minority of people who go about their business on a bike, whether it's a BSO, a 'bent or a Colnago.

The programme makers can come back to me about this when they've dealt with the Range Rover that cut me up in the car and the jerk who overtook on double white lines into oncoming traffic last night. And after dispatching all the nob-ends who use a mobile while driving and those impatient types who just have to squeeze past to save 15 seconds off their journey time... that's if they don't get passed by me at the next set of lights.

And so we go round and round. Yes car drivers are far more dangerous than cyclists and congratulations that you've been cut up by one. Hardly unique. But cyclists are still a minority and as long as there's a sizeable number of cyclists acting irresponsibly it can hardly be surprising that we 'get tarred with the same brush' and have the weight of the media on us. Or do you imagine the media to be fair, balanced and impartial? 40 million car drivers against (at best) a couple of million regular cyclists - you do the sums and make up your mind which group gets the biggest say in this. I for one am not at all surprised that broadcasters and newspapers pick on us because we have so many amongst our number happy to give them ammunition.

ride_whenever

Seriously, who gives a fcuk?

The media is full of garbage, the people who actually take it as gospel or take any form of opinion from it without consideration are idiots who cannot think for themselves.

Personally i'll continue to enjoy not breaking the law and the zen-like bubble that is my daily commute.

Porgy

zanes wrote:

Having commuted every day by bike for two years, and going for road rides every weekend this year I feel I must be doing something wrong.... In those two and a half years I've had one "memorable" run in- 50% my fault, 1 car involved crash-my fault and a handful of times where cars have pulled out/overtaken too close. :?

I've lived in various different bits of London over 25 years. I have to say that the people of Kent are the biggest bunch of anti-cycling turds I have ever come across.

Nowhere else do I get stuff thrown at me from cars, or the ones that come up really close behind and beep the horn or shout boo!!

Nowhere else do motorists seem to take such great delight in cutting me up or driving at me on the wrong side of the road.

People of Kent - I salute you - buch of biggoted BNP voting losers - a bigger bunch of sh.its I've yet to meet!!

Porgy

ride_whenever wrote:

The media is full of garbage, the people who actually take it as gospel or take any form of opinion from it without consideration are idiots who cannot think for themselves.

North Kent is full of idiots who can't think for themselves. I wish the bloody media didn't keep winding them up so much. I'm seriously considering getting a train just out of the area before I get on the bike now.

Porgy

oscarbudgie wrote:

Simon E wrote:

oscarbudgie wrote:

Perhaps we do need to get 'our' house in order?

No, my house is fine.

There are miscreants in all walks of life. Do you suggest all peds get their house in order when one iPod-wearing idiot jaywalks in your path? Do all car drivers need to go back to driving school because a boy-racer screeches around the streets or an OAP gets clocked by a Gatso? No.

I condemn pavement cycling, RLJing and so on. Anyone who does it is breaking the law. People who break the law are not my responsibility, even though as a cyclist I resent being tarred with the same brush by people in the media, erroneously termed 'journalists', who haven't anything better to do. I also resent the premise of the programme that cyclists collectively have a case to answer for the actions of a small minority of people who go about their business on a bike, whether it's a BSO, a 'bent or a Colnago.

The programme makers can come back to me about this when they've dealt with the Range Rover that cut me up in the car and the jerk who overtook on double white lines into oncoming traffic last night. And after dispatching all the nob-ends who use a mobile while driving and those impatient types who just have to squeeze past to save 15 seconds off their journey time... that's if they don't get passed by me at the next set of lights.

And so we go round and round. Yes car drivers are far more dangerous than cyclists and congratulations that you've been cut up by one. Hardly unique. But cyclists are still a minority and as long as there's a sizeable number of cyclists acting irresponsibly it can hardly be surprising that we 'get tarred with the same brush' and have the weight of the media on us. Or do you imagine the media to be fair, balanced and impartial? 40 million car drivers against (at best) a couple of million regular cyclists - you do the sums and make up your mind which group gets the biggest say in this. I for one am not at all surprised that broadcasters and newspapers pick on us because we have so many amongst our number happy to give them ammunition.

You still ahven't answered this yet.

porgy wrote:

oscarbudgie wrote:

Perhaps we do need to get 'our' house in order? .

How?

until you do everything you say is just so much meaningless hot air.

Eau Rouge

ride_whenever wrote:

Seriously, who gives a fcuk?

The media is full of garbage, the people who actually take it as gospel or take any form of opinion from it without consideration are idiots who cannot think for themselves.

RW, meet the General Public, General Public, this is RW.
Press like this, especially a myrid of articles about cyclists breaking the law and a lack of press about cyclists being put in uneccessary danger by inconsiderate driving, forms Public Opinion. For most people this opinion is formed casually, they don't spend hours going through the articles to see if the claims stand up or anything like that. They take the casual "cyclists break the law they shouldn't " message without putting much thought into it at all, but once it's formed in public opinion those in power will start to act on it, and that would not be good. Rather than tackling bad driving, they will blame the cyclists for being there in the first place and enact laws to move us off the roads altogether, for our own safety you understand.

You may call them idiots, but you can't seriously say you don't have plenty of these ill-formed headline-based unexamined opinions too on other topics, we all do.

OldSkoolKona

Sadly the same rules don't get applied to cyclists as motorists in media coverage.

The danger of cycling on pavements or going through red lights (both of which I abhor myself) is blown out of proportion, while motorists can break the speed limit, use their mobile phone, drink drive, and cause the death of around 7 people a day, yet we don't have tv shows talking about how motorists rights have been taken too far (if anything, it is portrayed as the opposite)

While you can say 'just ignore these articles or tv shows', they influence the 'man on the street' to think that its ok to drive dangerously near cyclists to 'teach them a lesson'.

A really good article on it (posted on the forum a while ago)
http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.com/2009 ... lture.html
or this one
http://garethrees.org/2009/12/11/zombies/

oscarbudgie

Hey I never said I had the answer - simply not to be surprised that things like this come along with such frequency. I haven't got a sign on my door saying Anti-Dickhead Legislator. I'm Ok, you're OK, we're OK aren't we? So the people who RLJ etc will continue to do so and we can all have the same conversation next week or next month - whenever the next Daily Mail anti-cycling piece is published - about how the media are so unbalanced and unfair and relate anecdotes about what terrible cnuts car drivers are. That's fine then.

Porgy

oscarbudgie wrote:

Hey I never said I had the answer - simply not to be surprised that things like this come along with such frequency. I haven't got a sign on my door saying Anti-Dickhead Legislator. I'm Ok, you're OK, we're OK aren't we? So the people who RLJ etc will continue to do so and we can all have the same conversation next week or next month - whenever the next Daily Mail anti-cycling piece is published - about how the media are so unbalanced and unfair and relate anecdotes about what terrible cnuts car drivers are. That's fine then.

but you said we should get our house in order. what does that mean?

ExeterSimon

As soon as we all stop throwing our toys out of the pram each time some jumped up journo scribes an anti-cycling article the sooner they'll crawl back into the gutter and find another target to have a pop at.

simon_e

oscarbudgie wrote:

I for one am not at all surprised that broadcasters and newspapers pick on us because we have so many amongst our number happy to give them ammunition.

"among our number"? What is this, the Army?

You appear to have ignored my point. Law-breaking people mounted upon bicycles are not part of 'our number', they're not 'one of us' or our responsibility. They are people who break the law. Therefore I feel absolutely no compulsion to put my house in order or any other act that you think will help. The individuals who break the law need to mend their ways.

I drew attention to the dangerous behaviour of drivers because motorised vehicles cause the vast majority of deaths and injuries on the roads. There were over 2,500 deaths on the road in 2008 and a lot more people seriously injured in the same period. Therefore cars, buses, lorries etc present a much greater risk to all road users. Isn't that what we should be talking about, instead of this pathetic drivel about "one in five cyclists riding roughshod over the laws"? I'm not saying RLJing is right, just that debating it on TV is a huge diversion by and for people who do not want to face up to their responsibilities.

soy_sauce

I think we should make a documentary of commuting and get our points across as cyclists who do their best to follow the law on the road but end up being badly treated because a small amount of cyclist's bad behaviours.


get a few cyclists in London to put on the action cams and record their commuting trips for a month.

iainment

Nothing will make a significant proportion of motorists change their prejudice against anyone on the road who they perceive as beneath them.

So I personally cycle pragmatically, I'll RLJ if safe to do so. Always give way to peds, don't ride on the pavement, use lights and wear hi viz but don't give cars any particular consideration apart from my safety.

Porgy

ExeterSimon wrote:

As soon as we all stop throwing our toys out of the pram each time some jumped up journo scribes an anti-cycling article the sooner they'll crawl back into the gutter and find another target to have a pop at.

I don;t think they even notice what we say tbh. I think we should have a go at jamming the BBC switchboard tonight though - they do have to listen to us.

ExeterSimon

Porgy wrote:

ExeterSimon wrote:

As soon as we all stop throwing our toys out of the pram each time some jumped up journo scribes an anti-cycling article the sooner they'll crawl back into the gutter and find another target to have a pop at.

I don;t think they even notice what we say tbh. I think we should have a go at jamming the BBC switchboard tonight though - they do have to listen to us.

I'll tune into BBC London from the Sky Box and give it watch. I know it's going to be biased but in the interests of fairness and jamming the BBC switchboards I'm up for it.

st199ml

Note sent to Inside Out. Worth a punt...

Hello there

I note with interest the features on tonight's programme, including one on a radical approach to organ donation. I wonder if this has anything to do with what sounds like a very cheap jibe at cyclists earlier in the programme. A piece centred on as weak a statistic as 1-in-5 is seemingly designed to further animosity between people who are just trying to get around on the roads, with potentially dangerous consequences. But at least London's hospitals will be well-stocked, eh?

If you are keen on highlighting the few who behave poorly on bikes, perhaps you would consider a follow-up which tells the story of one or more of the thousands of people who safely and lawfully cycle the roads of London everyday. Many carry helmet cams so would be perfectly happy to tell their story visually as well as verbally.

I'd be happy to participate in any such piece, and would encourage my cycling friends to take part too.

I look forward to hearing from you.

oscarbudgie

Simon E wrote:

oscarbudgie wrote:

I for one am not at all surprised that broadcasters and newspapers pick on us because we have so many amongst our number happy to give them ammunition.

"among our number"? What is this, the Army?

You appear to have ignored my point. Law-breaking people mounted upon bicycles are not part of 'our number', they're not 'one of us' or our responsibility. They are people who break the law. Therefore I feel absolutely no compulsion to put my house in order or any other act that you think will help. The individuals who break the law need to mend their ways.

I drew attention to the dangerous behaviour of drivers because motorised vehicles cause the vast majority of deaths and injuries on the roads. There were over 2,500 deaths on the road in 2008 and a lot more people seriously injured in the same period. Therefore cars, buses, lorries etc present a much greater risk to all road users. Isn't that what we should be talking about, instead of this pathetic drivel about "one in five cyclists riding roughshod over the laws"? I'm not saying RLJing is right, just that debating it on TV is a huge diversion by and for people who do not want to face up to their responsibilities.

If the law breaking cyclists are nothing to do with you then why are you getting hot under the collar about a programme about them? To keep saying cars etc are more dangerous etc than cyclists is just stating the obvious. To keep making the argument that cyclists who don't obey rules are irrelevant because motor vehicles do it all the time doesn't make cyclists any safer. Programmes like this will continue to be made and attract an audience because they reinforce the prejudices of many many people who have an antipathy towards cyclists. Of course it is wrong and of course its cheap lazy journalism but it has a ready and sympathetic audience because such hostilty to cyclists is constantly compounded by RLJ'ers, pavement cyclists and one way streeter's . Its just too simplistic to say 'it's not my problem' because other cyclists make it a problem for all of us, as this programme and countless newpaper columns prove

Porgy

I'm a law abiding cyclist and most of the jibes I get are about seem to be about taking the lane when I need to, using the road at all (road tax jibe), not wearing a helmet (not a legal requirment) not giving way to the obviously superior motor vehicle even though the right of way is in my favour, and not using the cycle lane when poor old motorist has footed the bill for and then covered it in glass, and then parked on it.

I still get from taxi drivers some rubbish about going through red lights - veen though I don't - but these people are simpletons and I don;t take them too seriously except when they try to hurt me.

I don;t think it makes any difference what cyclists do - my own experience is most cyclists are fully legal and yet even friends of mine keep claiming all cyclists go through red lights don;t they?

There are a percentage of motorists who just hate cyclists and always will. these people need to be tackled. it is just not acceptable in this age. BBC London have always had an anti-cycling edge - a couple fo years ago a trailer they ran hourly included a mention of cyclists followed by a sound affect of a bicycle bell and someone shouting "oi that's a red light!"

deptfordmarmoset

Just seen it - all the usual ''lycra lout'' nonsense and yet I failed to see a single cycling infraction by anyone wearing lycra. Curious how rent-a-quote clichés are not borne out by the filmed ''evidence''. I'll rewind it and check again.

Oh, the one chap in lycra got stopped for cycling through a red was alongside a Palletline truck who also went through the red light. That's about it: stop the cyclist, because clearly it's more dangerous for a bike to jump a red then for a lorry to do so.

fnegroni

I have just finished watching the programme on iPlayer.

I think the programme was OK: in 10 minutes it highlighted one thing which I think can't be dismissed: most people taking up cycling in recent years do need some further training.

Of course they have mostly concentrate on the bad cyclists in their footage. They have been somewhat fair in mentioning that the vast majority of cyclists do not behave this way, and are pretty safe.

I am disappointed they didn't mention two resources that are readily available to all cyclists: Cyclecraft and and the BikeAbility programme.

I also wished they had shown the traffic situation from the point of view of a law-abiding cyclist rather than footage of 'critical mass'.

A more balanced view, especially if the presenter had been a real commuter himself, would have been more appropriate.

If you are reading BBC, this is food for thought for a future programme.

Bassjunkieuk

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Just seen it - all the usual ''lycra lout'' nonsense and yet I failed to see a single cycling infraction by anyone wearing lycra. Curious how rent-a-quote clichés are not borne out by the filmed ''evidence''. I'll rewind it and check again.

I was quite surprised they managed to drop the lycra lout line within 30 seconds of starting the piece! As you say tho I didn't see any lycra'd up cyclists disobeying the law and instead appeared to be the people who have clearly walked into Evans with their C2W voucher and brought whatever hybrid the salesperson could flog them along with the obligatory Altura Nightvision jacket.

Canny Jock

Also just seen it on iPlayer - while some of the points are genuine (no defending some of the filmed behaviour) it is very lazy journalism. And apart from the one lady interviewed whose daughter was hit by a cyclist it is difficult to see where their evidence of cyclists being 'dangerous' rather than just occasionally annoying comes from.

The guy from LCC I agree with when it comes to those with larger vehicles having more responsibility - as cyclists we should certainly be on the lookout for pedestrians as we all know they move slowly and in a lot of cases aren't expecting/can't hear bikes coming. This naturally leads to car/van/bus/lorry drivers also having to look out for us more but at no point was this mentioned, or in fact any solution to the sub-standard road behaviour of many road users, apart from the suggestion that having many police watching out for cycling RLJ'ers would help! I would love to see the bare facts reported on the number of road accidents/serious injuries/deaths caused by cyclists compared to other road users.

I also agree with the above that using the critical mass footage to paint all cyclists in a negative light was poor (or again lazy).

I think the main point that they nearly got to though was that half a million commuter journeys a day are made by bike - which has minimal impact on the road, hardly or never causes injury or death to others, virtually zero impact apart from bike production to the environment, while making people fitter and therefore less of a burden to the NHS - shouldn't they be focussing on how to get more people on bikes?

Anyone know where I can go and leave a comment on a BBC site about how poor this program was? Or does the fact I can't find anywhere suggest that they know already
:?

simon_e

oscarbudgie wrote:

If the law breaking cyclists are nothing to do with you then why are you getting hot under the collar about a programme about them?

The programme is not my concern - it's made by bigots to appeal to their kind. An awful lot of TV is similar brain rot.

I am trying (and it appears failing) to communicate to you that comments suggest we cyclists put our house in order were pointless. The idea that we act as some kind of collective and "get tough on the causes of RLJing" - and thereby magically provide bigots with one less arrow to fire at cyclists as road users - is laughable. I can't manipulate other road users' habits. If I could then RLJing cyclists would not be top of my list.

Programmes like this will continue to be made and attract an audience because they reinforce the prejudices of many many people who have an antipathy towards cyclists.

. Tell me something new, I ride on the roads every day. I don't RLJ, ride on the pavement or ride at night without lights. What do you honestly expect me to do about the people in London, Manchester, Glasgow and all points in between who do? :roll:

Even if we rid the streets of our cities of the scourge that is cyclists who <gasp> flout the law, does anyone really think it will stop the erratic driving, the sniping, the Daily Mail articles or the carnage? Perhaps taxi drivers will smile sweetly as they glide by giving us 2 metres of space; buses, 4x4s and limos will follow considerately behind respecting our right to use the highway.... Yeah, right!

Let me know how your education programme for errant cyclists goes, I wish you every success

deptfordmarmoset

Anyone know where I can go and leave a comment on a BBC site about how poor this program was? Or does the fact I can't find anywhere suggest that they know already

I just registered a complaint, Canny, on http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/homepage/

On no account hit the back button though. I just made my complaint, went back to check something, and the whole bleedin' lot disappeared! It's slow enough as it is...

Did anybody notice that the Palletline lorry that went through the red light? Cyclist was abreast of it - no excusing the cyclist, but no excusing the road-blindness that focusing on (scapegoating) cyclists seems to induce. Let's nick a >200kg combination and let the 2 ton lorry pass unnoticed.

oscarbudgie

Very balanced that they should find an obvious retard (the guy at Critical Mass) to state the cyclists point of view.

deptfordmarmoset

oscarbudgie wrote:

Very balanced that they should find an obvious retard (the guy at Critical Mass) to state the cyclists point of view.

Bogdanowicz made sense though.

Bikequin

What really get me is the idea that the police should only crack down on cyclists - I'm all for RLJ'rs getting an on the spot fine if they're caught - but only if in turn the police start prosecuting motorists for encroaching on ASLs etc.

Christophe3967

Just watched it and can't recall seeing anyone wearing lycra behaving stupidly - the biggest muppet was the middle-aged codger on a shopping bike. Overall, I thought it was a fair reflection on what happens in central London - most riders obey the law but a sizeable minority don't, and it's easy to see why people get upset about it. Glad to learn that the police are going to have a crack down on RLJs too.

The bit on Critical Mass was an eye opener though. No wonder cyclists are looked at askance by so many black cab drivers.

Canny Jock

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Anyone know where I can go and leave a comment on a BBC site about how poor this program was? Or does the fact I can't find anywhere suggest that they know already

I just registered a complaint, Canny, on http://www.bbc.co.uk

Excellent, thanks for that.