ASA banning cycle safety advert
Comments
-
Carbonator wrote:Well summed up diy.
Also, she is probably going pretty slowly and not ideal to overtake on a bike.
The car is giving her such a wide birth because of where she is. If she were a sensible distance from the kerb, the car would be more likely to be a sensible distance from her.
if that were a real photo of a real situation I would say that the driver is giving her verbal and thats why she is looking across at him.
Surely overtaking a slow moving cyclist is easier than overtaking a speedy cyclist/time-trial expert? It means you can complete the overtaking in less time (and distance)?
I'm no Tony Martin, but it's amazing the amount of overtaking cars who misjudge the time and distance it takes to pass me, and either have to drop back or cut in.0 -
Not if they are in the middle of the road.
Do you undertake? Overtake?
Give an extra wide berth like the car has?
Avoid overtaking near a turning on the right in case they suddenly turn right?
Anyway, its not real and I do not really remember having to pass someone as shown in the picture.0 -
Video shows her coming up to a badly potholed surface - still frame conveniently misses this. It also makes the point that horses are given respect and room and cyclists should get the same.
Were some of the contributors to this thread amongst the five people who complained about it???
DIsappointed in the ASA as I had previously thought they made judgements based on facts and acted to protect the consumer against rougue advertisers and companies. Now seems to be another Clarkson/Daily Mail type response that is not based on the actual point being made, but instead focussing on the driver being potentially inconvenienced by a cyclist avoiding the dangerous road surface...
Petition rapidly gathering signatures
http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/s ... lane#share
Apologies for the length - copied and pasted0 -
Indeed it's quite ironic that it's a cycling safety advert getting blocked for showing safe cycling - that really is the size of the mountain we have to climb.0
-
I read the article this morning and from the one photograph I think the advert looks to be poorly made.
Drivers have a bad impression of cyclists. The last thing you want it to give them any ammunition to complain about cyclists or to ignore the message in the video.
A driver could look at that picture and think "I'm not going to give them that much distance when I overtake as I'm dangerously close to the centre of the road". Or they may say "How am I supposed to overtake when they cycle so far from the curb". I ride fairly close to the curb but I've still had verbal discussions with drivers at lights because they think I was blocking their overtake.
Helmets are an interesting discussion and I think you're always going to get a heated debate when using them. I use one but I'm not sure how much benefit I get from one. I though that I can cycle at 30 MPH on a slight downhill and over 40 MPH on a good decent - any protection at those speeds no matter how inconsequential has to be better than none. I therefore think it is irresponsible not to wear one - but that is my view. The view of motorists could be "look at that woman, blocking my road and not even wearing a helmet". When trying to get motorists to change their view you have to make cylcists look responsible and I think a helmet helps.0 -
Not sure what the UK laws are but in France, you have to leave AT LEAST 1m gap in towns, and AT LEAST 1.5m gap out of towns. By law.
Not sure what the gap is in the ad, but it looks about 1.5 ish to me, so where's the problem? Cyclists often have to move out into the road a bit, to avoid drains, etc.
Better a too big gap than a too small one.0 -
Looking past the ASA aspect for a sec .. ads trying to persuade motorists from doing things require the ad to show some consequences of their actions.
This isnt a bike ad, but it's a pretty effective road safety / take responsibility ad .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvLaTupw-hkAll the above is just advice .. you can do whatever the f*ck you wana do!
Bike Radar Strava Club
The Northern Ireland Thread0 -
What's a curb?More problems but still living....0
-
It's mental, the horrific advert with parents being interrupted having sex is ok but this gets banned?
Although I do thinks she seems a very long way out into the road, far further across than would be necessary but then you can't see what's up ahead so it may have been required.0 -
dw300 wrote:Looking past the ASA aspect for a sec .. ads trying to persuade motorists from doing things require the ad to show some consequences of their actions.
so like this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy-sIfsW7tg so you can show an ad with some cyclists clearly not wearing helmets or any other safety attire (like they look well prepared for a days ride in the countryside travesing across the middle of farmers fields with little more than a wicker basket and dog for company)...so long as one of them gets squished by a train :roll:
I have to say stuff like this just seriously frustates me, its bad enough having to fight your way around on a bike treating cycling like some Running Man style gameshow combat sport (C4 dont need to chuck a bunch of Z listers + Sir Steve, off a mountain, give them bikes and make them commute through London be far more dangerous) battling the constant threat to your personal safety by motorists so irate their passengers can now leap out and attack you, the inane authorities who dream up schemes to make it even harder to get around with the town planners who think daubing a bit of paint on a road equates to providing proper infrastructure, and then you get self appointed quangos like the ASA who start deciding their remit also covers social responsibility, who decide totally arbitarily using no terms anyone has ever heard of, whats a parking lane !?!, and ban an advert thats actually promoting better treatment of cyclists on a road,which fully complies with the highway code.
the Dutch must think we truly are mad(der) when it comes to how we handle cycling in this country.0 -
Buckie2k5 wrote:To be fair making a cycle safety advert and not having the cyclist wear a helmet is just stupid. What did they expect.
The helmet is there to reduce the probability of brain injury when a fall results in a head impact.
Brain injury is not a common cause of death for cyclists in collisions with motorist transport, crushing is more common why is the helmet relevant?
TBH given the Scandinavian style "Right To Roam" in Scotland (http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/o ... s/cycling/) isn't there plenty of Scotland to ride that isn't road?I used to just ride my bike to work but now I find myself going out looking for bigger and bigger hills.0 -
-
Airwaves are full of ads luring vulnerable folk to apply for loans at obsene interest rates BUT ASA bans a cycle safety ad. Who are these people?
JimKind words butter no parsnips.0 -
awavey wrote:dw300 wrote:Looking past the ASA aspect for a sec .. ads trying to persuade motorists from doing things require the ad to show some consequences of their actions.
so like this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy-sIfsW7tg so you can show an ad with some cyclists clearly not wearing helmets or any other safety attire (like they look well prepared for a days ride in the countryside travesing across the middle of farmers fields with little more than a wicker basket and dog for company)...so long as one of them gets squished by a train :roll:
I have to say stuff like this just seriously frustates me, its bad enough having to fight your way around on a bike treating cycling like some Running Man style gameshow combat sport (C4 dont need to chuck a bunch of Z listers + Sir Steve, off a mountain, give them bikes and make them commute through London be far more dangerous) battling the constant threat to your personal safety by motorists so irate their passengers can now leap out and attack you, the inane authorities who dream up schemes to make it even harder to get around with the town planners who think daubing a bit of paint on a road equates to providing proper infrastructure, and then you get self appointed quangos like the ASA who start deciding their remit also covers social responsibility, who decide totally arbitarily using no terms anyone has ever heard of, whats a parking lane !?!, and ban an advert thats actually promoting better treatment of cyclists on a road,which fully complies with the highway code.
the Dutch must think we truly are mad(der) when it comes to how we handle cycling in this country.
^^^Yes! +10!0 -
Initialised wrote:Buckie2k5 wrote:To be fair making a cycle safety advert and not having the cyclist wear a helmet is just stupid. What did they expect.
The helmet is there to reduce the probability of brain injury when a fall results in a head impact.
Brain injury is not a common cause of death for cyclists in collisions with motorist transport, crushing is more common why is the helmet relevant?
Well its all about setting an example. One of your teenage kids decides to take up road cycling would you not insist he wore a helmet? They wouldnt be leaving my house without one.0 -
Err, yes, and it's a marvellous thing too, but it's a little bit much to expect people to nip down to the corner shop in Edinburgh via the Lairig Ghru:Initialised wrote:TBH given the Scandinavian style "Right To Roam" in Scotland (http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/o ... s/cycling/) isn't there plenty of Scotland to ride that isn't road?
0 -
0
-
markhewitt1978 wrote:http://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2014/Cycling-Scotland-Ruling.aspx
They've admitted they were wrong.
Finally.
Presumably this chief exec of the ASA is on a 6 figure salary, let's hope he forgoes his bonus for having got it so woefully wrong.0 -
markhewitt1978 wrote:http://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2014/Cycling-Scotland-Ruling.aspx
They've admitted they were wrong.
They have said they may have made a mistake and they are having another think about it. Still not clear what the final outcome will be...0 -
markhewitt1978 wrote:http://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2014/Cycling-Scotland-Ruling.aspx
They've admitted they were wrong.
About the distance from the kerb, NOT about the "not wearing helmet or high visisbility clothing" - which to most of us is the most important bit they got "wrong".0 -
Seems like the ASA are having second thoughts, or someone has told them they've stepped outside of their powers.0
-
rafletcher wrote:markhewitt1978 wrote:http://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2014/Cycling-Scotland-Ruling.aspx
They've admitted they were wrong.
About the distance from the kerb, NOT about the "not wearing helmet or high visisbility clothing" - which to most of us is the most important bit they got "wrong".
The ASA announcement says Scottish Cycling complained about the ASA's criticism on the distance from the kerb.
Why complain about all the ruling when just one element can get the advert re-instated - when they concede on that bit but uphold the ban on another ruling then you can complain about that ruling too ...0 -
Pleased to see this is under review.
Hopefully the ASA will accept Cycling Scotland's responses and that there is nothing wrong with the video.
It is a bit of an unusual video, but the actual cycling on the road part has absolutely nothing wrong with it. It's interesting how the still frame chosen doesn't actually show the potholes coming up or how the car actually completes the pass and stays within the left hand side of the road. No oncoming traffic appears, so not sure where the ASA got that from either.
It has generated quite a bit of coverage on the Scottish news, so it may have inadvertantly brought the need for safe passing space to more motorists attention.0 -
I can't believe what I've just read here, not just the ludicrous decision by the ASA and their frankly worrying opinions but also the lack of understanding by some cyclists on here about how to position themselves on the road to be as safe as possible. Am I hallucinating or did a cyclist say words to the effect of cyclists should ride closer to the kerb as cars can then squeeze past more easily? You ride out from the kerb so that motorists have to slow down and wait for a safe gap in oncoming traffic to pass.0
-
Yes - there are some unusual comments in some of the posts here...0
-
Like Pross I'm also somewhat amazed some cyclists appear to be advocationg the ASAs stance that the cyclist not wearing a helmet is a consideration and seemingly agreeing that motorists should be allowed to perform an on the spot judgement of your attire and how seriously you take your own safety when they negociate you on the road. The advert was to remind motorists of their legal obligations when encountering other road users was it not? To say otherwise smacks of the attitude that says 'hmmn, no helmet, no hi-viz...clearly asking for it'...which I think is nonsense.0
-
verylonglegs wrote:Like Pross I'm also somewhat amazed some cyclists appear to be advocationg the ASAs stance that the cyclist not wearing a helmet is a consideration and seemingly agreeing that motorists should be allowed to perform an on the spot judgement of your attire and how seriously you take your own safety when they negociate you on the road. The advert was to remind motorists of their legal obligations when encountering other road users was it not? To say otherwise smacks of the attitude that says 'hmmn, no helmet, no hi-viz...clearly asking for it'...which I think is nonsense.
Absolutely. With friends like that, who needs enemies?!0 -
Indeed, surely the point of having someone riding helmet-less and not in lycra is to promote the the fact that you don't need a helmet and lycra to ride a bike, it's perfectly possible to incorporate cycling into everyday life.0
-
If you hire a Boris Bike, they don't come with a helmet.0
-
im missing something here, what safety message does this advert send out ? should have been banned because it is rubbish, double click the pic - plays the video.
Show the after effects of a cyclist (of course wearing a helmet) that's just been hit by a car at 50 or 60mph and the resulting trauma that the car driver and the cyclists family, then experiences? but this was some sort of joke ad, portraying cyclists as bunch of nutters.
I don't know if the drivers down here are different but regardless of where you are positioned most will try and overtake, a solo rider, regardless of on coming traffic, blind bends or anything else for that matter.0
