Journalism and cycling

magicbastarder

i guess one of the most effective PR campaigns on that front (though obviously not intended as such!) was the barney between the ref and the schools coach regarding a player who received a blow to the head during a schools match:
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/support-for-referee-over-gonzaga-player-with-head-injury-1.2532997

tomasrojo

magicbastarder wrote: »

i guess one of the most effective PR campaigns on that front (though obviously not intended as such!) was the barney between the ref and the schools coach regarding a player who received a blow to the head during a schools match:
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/support-for-referee-over-gonzaga-player-with-head-injury-1.2532997

That's quite enlightening in a few ways.

Chuchote

And more of the relentless negativity:

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/travel/which-are-the-20-best-cities-to-cycle-in-hint-dublin-is-no-longer-one-of-them-1.3194435

Which are the 20 best cities to cycle in? Hint: Dublin is no longer one of them
Leonie Corcoran
(snip)
A ranking looks at 140 cities around the world. Back in 2011, the first year of the report by Copenhagen design company Copenhagenzie, Dublin was ranked ninth. Admittedly this was a surprise to many in the capital, with then Lord Mayor Andrew Montague describing the result as “astonishing”.
But back then Dublin was experiencing a “grand rebound” and was awarded 12 bonus points for “particularly impressive efforts”. It achieved a top 10 spot due to “ballsy political decision-making” according to the authors of the index. They cited the “wildly successful bike share programme, visionary politicians who implemented bike lanes and 30km/hr zones and a citizenry who have merely shrugged and gotten on with it”.
The judging for the index is based on 14 parameters, including advocacy, parking facilities, infrastructure, bike share schemes, politics, social acceptance, traffic calming and perceptions of safety.
This year, the authors say Ireland has slipped out of the Top 20 because “after many years of progress, the city has stagnated and, to be honest, disappointed”. Cyclists in the capital won’t disagree, but don’t despair, there are many bicycle-friendly cities a short flight away and perfect for an autumn weekend getaway. (snip)

(I would have regarded this as important when the figures were published a month or so ago, but in the context of the current coverage…)

tomasrojo

Cyclists in the capital won’t disagree, but don’t despair, there are many bicycle-friendly cities a short flight away and perfect for an autumn weekend getaway.

I don't think they understand the principle of utility cycling.

"Why don't you run along and do your funny little hobby in your spare time."

tomasrojo

I have to commend Copenhagenize on their ability to get media coverage. Not so sure about the consistency or transparency of their Index.

Chuchote

Odd that The Irish Times doesn't write about things like this

http://cyclingwithoutage.ie/

https://twitter.com/FionaDoris/status/900037805258272768

tomasrojo

Not 100% sure, but think they might have written something about Cycling Without Age.

adrian522

I find this very interesting, it is about the case n the UK where a cyclist without a front brake hit a pedestrian who subsequently passed away.

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/aug/23/motorist-would-not-have-landed-cyclists-wanton-and-furious-driving-charge

He was charged with manslaughter and wanton and furious driving, which motorists running down pedestrians would not be charged with (according to the writer who is "a leading personal injury/clinical negligence lawyer"

The most interesting thing I find was in the reporting of this in comparison to the hundreds of pedestrians killed by cars every year:

Some press reports were full of language (“ploughed into” etc) that is seldom seen when a car driver (or as was being dealt with in a nearby court, a speeding motorcycle rider) runs down a pedestrian.

Alliston may not have revealed himself to be a very attractive character and no one can fail to feel anguish about the terrible waste of yet another life. However there is a lot about the bringing of charges at this level, and the conviction for wanton and furious cycling, to cause substantial disquiet notwithstanding Alliston’s acquittal on the manslaughter charge.

If it is going to make any meaningful contribution to the reduction of danger on the roads, our criminal justice system needs to recalibrate away from the prejudice that motoring is innocuous and cycling dangerous and towards controlling the behaviour of those imposing greatest risk.

P_1

adrian522 wrote: »

I find this very interesting, it is about the case n the UK where a cyclist without a front brake hit a pedestrian who subsequently passed away.

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/aug/23/motorist-would-not-have-landed-cyclists-wanton-and-furious-driving-charge

He was charged with manslaughter and wanton and furious driving, which motorists running down pedestrians would not be charged with (according to the writer who is "a leading personal injury/clinical negligence lawyer"

The most interesting thing I find was in the reporting of this in comparison to the hundreds of pedestrians killed by cars every year:

Yeah I've been following that one too. Absolute madness how heavy handed the case was treated. Having said that I do question the wisdom of riding a fixie with no brakes in a busy urban environment.

HivemindXX

That IT thing with the doctor was a little confusing. Am I right to think the quote was basically, brain specialist says that injured cyclists sent to him at the brain injury unit had a lot of brain injuries? Surely that should not be surprising.

I imagine if you asked an orthopaedic surgeon you'd find that in their experience a lot of cycling injuries resulted in broken bones. If you asked the school nurse you'd find that most injuries were easily dealt with with a bit of dettol and a sticky bandage.

This sort of sad excuse for journalism is why the most common thing people tell me when they find out I commute by bike is that they would love to do it but it is just too dangerous.

magicbastarder

dentist: 'from what i can see, 100% of cyclists attending my clinic in the aftermath of cycling incidents have suffered dental damage'.

to be fair, i guess it's standard journalistic boilerplate to get some generic quotes from the medical staff about the sort of injuries they treat.

Traumadoc

magicbastarder wrote: »

dentist: 'from what i can see, 100% of cyclists attending my clinic in the aftermath of cycling incidents have suffered dental damage'.

to be fair, i guess it's standard journalistic boilerplate to get some generic quotes from the medical staff about the sort of injuries they treat.

All cyclists I see at my trauma clinic have sustained some sort of
trauma.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Jimoslimos

adrian522 wrote: »

I find this very interesting, it is about the case n the UK where a cyclist without a front brake hit a pedestrian who subsequently passed away.

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/aug/23/motorist-would-not-have-landed-cyclists-wanton-and-furious-driving-charge

He was charged with manslaughter and wanton and furious driving, which motorists running down pedestrians would not be charged with (according to the writer who is "a leading personal injury/clinical negligence lawyer"

The most interesting thing I find was in the reporting of this in comparison to the hundreds of pedestrians killed by cars every year:

An absolutely baffling verdict, and made even crazier by the judge indicating that a custodial sentence (based on an an interpretation of an archaic law) would be likely.

Prosecution rested on the following;
He had no front brake - Guilty and should be charged with that.
Having a front brake would have prevented the collision - Unproven, based on extremely dubious science on a completely different bike. Jury should have been told to ignore that "evidence"
It was a track bike "like the sort ridden in the Olympic velodrome" - Irrelevant
He was cycling at nearly "20 mph" - Well obviously out on the road since he wasn't fast enough for the aforementioned velodrome
He's a bit of a dick - Guilty, but irrelevant.

To me, a charge of wanton and furious driving would only have been applicable if he had run a red light or if the woman had been on a pedestrian crossing.

I think the fact it was a jury trial also contributed to the verdict. Can imagine emotion rather than interpretation of the law played a large part.

Chuchote

Irish Times today:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/life-after-a-cycling-accident-my-world-changed-in-a-heartbeat-1.3196116?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Life after a cycling accident: ‘My world changed in a heartbeat’
Geraldine Lavelle lives in a care home after being paralysed in a collision in 2013

Seán Dunne

Geraldine Lavelle’s life changed “in a heartbeat”. That was in October 2013 when she was left paralysed from the chest down following a collision with a lorry.
The Sligo native had become accustomed to enjoying an early-morning cycle before work, until the accident cycling on the Longford-Mullingar road changed life for the then 27-year-old.
The collision left Ms Lavelle, a graduate of NUI Galway where she gained a first-class master’s degree in neuroscience, with spinal fractures and paralysed from the chest down.
“I was a keen cyclist, I cycled 25-30km Monday to Friday before work and I was only getting into it when the accident occurred. I had done one 60km race and one 100km race before the accident,” Ms Lavelle said.

No analysis of the cause of crashes whatsoever. The only references to how the "accident" happened are the fact that it was a "collision with a lorry" when she was "enjoying an early-morning cycle", and this:

Sometimes she gets upset thinking back to the day the accident happened but her message is simple. “Drivers: check your mirrors and be conscious of other users on the roads.”

I had thought The Irish Times was getting less fluffy and more journalistic under its new editor, but don't any longer find it so - it seems to have sunk back into being a kind of broadsheet Cosmopolitan.

magicbastarder

to be fair, it could be an attempt to humanise those people many drivers see simply as rolling roadblocks - to put faces and stories behind the accidents a simple lapse of concentration can cause.

with all the stories of the increased number of fatalities this year, it *is* kinda topical.

not that i would agree with all the language used in the articles.

Pinch Flat

The Indo are running similar, this one about a pedestrian hit by a car "if he was wearing hi vis I would have seen him"

http://m.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/death-on-a-rural-irish-road-i-knew-id-hit-someone-but-there-was-no-body-on-the-road-36062834.html

magicbastarder

that's a hell of a discrepancy:

Martin thought he was travelling at around 85km/hour but the inquest, which took place some months later heard that a Garda report found he was travelling at between 47 and 56km/hour, based on the forensics, from impact and where the body was found.

Pinch Flat

The Indo journos are desperately looking for one on cycling "If he had of being paying road tax (sic), perhaps I wouldn't have hit him". Watch this space

Danbo!

Pinch Flat wrote: »

"if he was wearing hi vis I would have seen him"

I can't even begin to imagine what it feels like to read that as a relative of the victim.

Chips Lovell

It's genuinely depressing people are coming out to bat for your man just because he's a cyclist.

He bragged about riding brakeless.

He roared twice at the woman to “get out of the way” before hitting her.

He then blamed the collision on her:

After seeing a newspaper report about the incident, Alliston posted a comment online claiming he tried to warn her but she had “ignored” him and “stopped dead” in his path

He wrote: “I feel bad due to the seriousness of her injuries but I can put my hand up and say this is not my fault.”

He wrote: “It is a pretty serious incident so I won’t bother saying she deserved it. It was her fault but she did not deserve it.”

The judge noted yesterday:

“I have not seen one iota of remorse from Mr Alliston at all at any stage.”

TheChizler

Reading the article about the woman who was killed, after reading the original article I posted I got the impression that his bike was an old rustbucket with missing parts (missing front brake etc.), I didn't realize it was a fixie!

Kind of changes my impression of the guy, I had the feeling he'd knowledgeably gone out with a defective and dangerous bike. With an actual fixie, while illegal and probably not the safest in an urban environment, I don't feel he was being that reckless.

magicbastarder

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

It's genuinely depressing people are coming out to bat for your man just because he's a cyclist.

you mean on boards or in general? there's actually been surprisingly little discussion of the case here, as far as i can see.

plodder

TheChizler wrote: »

Reading the article about the woman who was killed, after reading the original article I posted I got the impression that his bike was an old rustbucket with missing parts (missing front brake etc.), I didn't realize it was a fixie!

Kind of changes my impression of the guy, I had the feeling he'd knowledgeably gone out with a defective and dangerous bike. With an actual fixie, while illegal and probably not the safest in an urban environment, I don't feel he was being that reckless.

I would have thought if you are cycling an unsafe, illegal bike in an urban environment, common sense would dictate a vastly more cautious approach to your cycling. He seems to have gone the opposite way.

What if a motorist with no front brakes rear ended and killed a cyclist? To be absolutely fair about it, I think very few motorists would be sticking up for him.

TheChizler

plodder wrote: »

What if a motorist with no front brakes rear ended and killed a cyclist? To be absolutely fair about it, I think very few motorists would be sticking up for him.

Given the extra power, mass, and potential speed involved in the case of a motorised vehicle with no front brake, I think it would be orders of magnitude more reckless and not a relevant comparison. Who's sticking up for him by the way?

RayCun

plodder wrote: »

What if a motorist with no front brakes rear ended and killed a cyclist? To be absolutely fair about it, I think very few motorists would be sticking up for him.

Fixies are sold without front brakes all the time (I think it's stupid hipsterism, but anyway) How many people buying them know they aren't road legal? How many people selling them know? Are they road legal in Ireland, is that just a UK law?

It's not like he took the brakes off himself, or his brakes broke and he didn't bother fixing them.

When a motorist hits a bike or a pedestrian, does a mechanic check over their car to make sure it would pass the NCT? Would a motorist be done for "wanton and furious driving" if they were involved in a crash at night, and they didn't have two headlights working correctly?

RayCun

Not that I'm sticking up for him, he seems like a dick, but it's more than a little odd that a cyclist is prosecuted for this and so few drivers are.

plodder

TheChizler wrote: »

Given the extra power, mass, and potential speed involved in the case of a motorised vehicle with no front brake, I think it would be orders of magnitude more reckless and not a relevant comparison.

Yet, the woman is still dead in this case. The opposing point of view would seem to be that if it wasn't recklessness, then it was just an unfortunate accident. Or worse, the woman's fault.

magicbastarder

RayCun wrote: »

How many people buying them know they aren't road legal? How many people selling them know?

how many bikes do you see being sold without bells?
obviously, i'm not equating lack of a bell with lack of a front brake in safety terms, but the law does mandate both.

plodder

RayCun wrote: »

When a motorist hits a bike or a pedestrian, does a mechanic check over their car to make sure it would pass the NCT? Would a motorist be done for "wanton and furious driving" if they were involved in a crash at night, and they didn't have two headlights working correctly?

I wouldn't get caught up on the exact offence, but it's highly likely a motorist would be charged with something. It happens all the time. Dangerous driving causing death, is an offence at the same level as manslaughter.

I'd be surprised as well if track bikes are sold without some kind of warning that they can't be used on the roads without brakes being added.

Moflojo

Pinch Flat wrote: »

The Indo are running similar, this one about a pedestrian hit by a car "if he was wearing hi vis I would have seen him"

http://m.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/death-on-a-rural-irish-road-i-knew-id-hit-someone-but-there-was-no-body-on-the-road-36062834.html

That article is really, really f**ked up! You'd swear 'Martin', the driver, was the victim of the collision! The real victim is barely given status as a human being in the entire article. I think it's genuinely outrageous to present a fatal collision entirely from the perspective of the person who did the killing.