Journalism and cycling

rubadub

magicbastarder wrote: »

our office is in leopardstown. a good few years ago, a woman commuted from armagh to the office. she drove to either newry or dundalk - can't remember which, but it was to catch the enterprise to connolly, got the dart from connolly to blackrock and the staff bus from blackrock to the office. and obviously the reverse in the evening.

I wonder how long she would have said her commute was on the census form.

I remembering hearing of some woman saying "the train only takes 50mins" trying to downplay the negative of moving out of dublin and commuting. But she might have been actually closing her door at 6.30am and job started at 9am, having to get a bus to the train station, and having to leave lots of time in case the bus is early/delayed, and might end up in work well before actual starting time.

The census questions are

How do you usually
travel to work, school
or college?
Mark one box only,
for the longest part, by
distance, of your usual
journey to work, school
or college

How long does your
journey to work, school
or college usually take?
Write in minutes

So if you take 2 hours to cycle 20miles to a train station and get a speedy train for 21miles then that is the one you select.

The 2nd question is not the "time between closing your door and having to start work". Many people are not on clock cards and will often arrive to work late if their boss is not that strict -these people are probably putting down this "hopeful time" rather than the real average. Many going by bus might time their journey from getting on the bus.

The 43% increase seemed high to me, I have not noticed any increase on my route. I wondered if people who availed of the bike to work scheme were ticking bike, even if they do not use it.

tomasrojo

Chuchote wrote: »

Chris Boardman says cycling in cities is too dangerous for him:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/31/chris-boardman-riding-a-bike-on-uk-roads-feels-too-dangerous-for-me

He was more careful than that. He said it "feels" too dangerous. He points out that it statistically isn't that dangerous(*), but it's too onerous and intimidating as things stand.


(*) Many people point out that cycling in the UK is only "statistically safe" because the vulnerable no longer cycle. This is a fair point, and one I often make myself about Ireland. But that still leaves you with a reasonable measure of risk for young-to-middle-aged adults, and the risk is not that high. Then again, the most dangerous roads have few cyclists, because people don't want to cycle on them.

Chuchote

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/world/asia/china-beijing-dockless-bike-share.html?action=click&contentCollection=Health&module=Trending&version=Full&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article

China, bike share and bad manners (selected quotes, much snippage)

As Bike-Sharing Brings Out Bad Manners, China Asks, What’s Wrong With Us?
By JAVIER C. HERNÁNDEZ SEPT. 2, 2017

There are now more than 16 million shared bicycles on the road in China’s traffic-clogged cities, thanks to a fierce battle for market share among 70-plus companies backed by a total of more than $1 billion in financing. These start-ups have reshaped the urban landscape, putting bikes equipped with GPS and digital locks on almost every street corner in a way that Silicon Valley can only dream of.

But their popularity has been accompanied by a wave of misbehavior. Because the start-ups do not use fixed docking stations, riders abandon bicycles haphazardly along streets and public squares, snarling traffic and cluttering sidewalks. Thieves have taken them by the tens of thousands, for personal use or selling them for parts. Angry and mischievous vandals hang them in trees, bury them in construction sites and throw them into lakes and rivers.

“We look at ourselves, and we ask, ‘What is wrong with the Chinese nation, the Chinese people?’” said Xu Qinduo, a political commentator for China Radio International in Beijing. Many people are proud of the country’s economic achievements and growing global clout, he added, but worry that it still lacks a strong sense of morals.

Some say abuse of the bicycles reflects an every-man-for-himself mentality in China that has its roots in the extreme poverty of the last century. Others are bothered by what they see as a lack of concern for strangers and public resources. The transgressions have been chronicled in the local news media with a tone of disbelief, in part because Chinese generally see themselves as a law-abiding society and crime rates are relatively low.

In many cities, the supply of bicycles far exceeds demand, bringing chaos to sidewalks, bus stops and intersections and prompting grumbles that excessive competitiveness — seen as a national trait — is spoiling a good thing. In Shanghai, where officials have struggled to maintain order, there is now one shared bike for every 16 people, according to government statistics.

City officials are also grappling with creative vandalism of the bicycles, which varies in severity from smashing the locking device to setting the entire vehicle on fire. Some of the destruction has been attributed to residents angry about the blight of bikes piling up in their neighborhoods. But the police in several cities have also cited disgruntled rickshaw and taxi drivers upset that bike-sharing has sapped their business.

Hu Weiwei, founder and president of Mobike, one of the most popular bike-sharing apps in China, said the benefits of shared bicycles far outweighed any inconvenience, noting reductions in carbon emissions and improvements in traffic.

Mobike has designed a point system to punish misdeeds like leaving a bike in the middle of a road, and Ms. Hu said she expected problems to disappear as companies became better at incentivizing virtuous behavior.

Yunxiang Yan, an anthropologist who serves as director of the U.C.L.A. Center for Chinese Studies, said China’s roots as an agricultural society made people more dependent on a small circle of relatives and friends and less trusting of strangers. As a result, he said, many people do not see the purpose of public property and are skeptical of communal rules.

“Public properties are seen as having no owner,” he said, “therefore people believe they can take advantage of them.”

But Mr. Yan said the overall success of bike sharing suggested that mutual trust was growing in China.

Mr. Zhao said he was motivated partly by patriotism. China has been pushing for years to develop technology products that catch fire overseas. Many now see promise in bike-sharing, with the domestic news media hailing it as one of China’s four great modern inventions, drawing a comparison with the ancient inventions of gunpowder, paper, printing and the compass.

Seweryn

Because cyclists put cars in danger while overtaking...

http://irishcycle.com/2017/09/03/1-5m-law-would-apply-to-bicycles-overtaking-cars-claim-officials/

amcalester

Seweryn wrote: »

Because cyclists put cars in danger while overtaking...

http://irishcycle.com/2017/09/03/1-5m-law-would-apply-to-bicycles-overtaking-cars-claim-officials/

...nail hits hammer...

rubadub

The Sunday Times also reports that officials believe that the passing distance offence would have to apply to both drivers and cyclists.

I wonder who these "officials" are. The draft copy of the law/bill made it clear that this was not the case.

Now I could have believed there was an oversight in the wording which originally included cyclists. But I have read the draft copy (can't find the link now), and it seemed they were well aware of the wording, and to make sure cyclists were not included. I could not believe they have rewritten it now to explicitly include cyclists.

As for this "unenforceable" nonsense reason for not even having the law. I do not believe it will be enforced and that the majority of people passing close than 1.5m will be done. People said the smoking ban would not be enforced, and it is actually not, most pubs I go to in dublin have technically illegal smoking areas (as they are no open enough), but the real goal of the law was successful. I do believe the law would see a huge reduction in "punishment passes", esp. by taxi drivers & bus drivers & other professional drivers who will have their jobs at risk, -and so not be willing to risk their livelihood & that of their family for such a stupid action with such massive risk and so little personal gain.

EDIT: found it.
Road Traffic (Minimum Passing Distance of Cyclists) Bill 2017

An Act to introduce protection for cyclists by setting safe lateral distance when being
passed by motor vehicles.
Be it enacted by the Oireachtas as follows:
Interpretation
1. In this Act—
“mechanically propelled vehicle” means a vehicle intended or adapted for propulsion by
mechanical means, including—
(a) a bicycle or tricycle with an attachment for propelling it by mechanical power,
whether or not the attachment is being used,
(b) a vehicle the means of propulsion of which is electrical or partly electrical and
partly mechanical, but not including a tramcar or other vehicle running on
permanent rails;
“pedal bicycle” means a bicycle which is intended or adapted for propulsion solely by the
physical exertions of a person or persons seated thereon.
Keeping a safe lateral distance when passing a cyclist
2. (1) The driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle passing a pedal bicycle that is
travelling in the same direction as the driver must pass the pedal bicycle at a sufficient
distance from the pedal bicycle.
(2) A sufficient distance from the pedal bicycle is—
(a) if the applicable speed limit is not more than 50 kilometres per hour a lateral
distance from the pedal bicycle of at least 1 metre, or
(b) if the applicable speed limit is more than 50 kilometres per hour a lateral distance
from the pedal bicycle of at least 1.5 metres.
(3) For the purpose of subsection (2), the lateral distance is the distance between the
following points—
(a) the furthermost point to the left on the driver’s mechanically propelled vehicle or
any projection from the vehicle (whether or not attached to the vehicle), and
(b) the furthermost point to the right on the pedal bicycle, any bicycle trailer towed
by the pedal bicycle, the rider or any passenger in or on any such trailer.
(4) The driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle who contravenes subsection (1) of this
section commits an offence and he or she shall be liable for a fixed charge penalty of
€80 with 3 penalty points on payment of a fixed charge and 5 penalty points and a fine
not exceeding €1,500 on conviction in court.
Short title
3. This Act may be cited as the Road Traffic (Minimum Passing Distance of Cyclists) Act
2017.

amcalester

rubadub wrote: »

I wonder who these "officials" are. The draft copy of the law/bill made it clear that this was not the case.

Now I could have believed there was an oversight in the wording which originally included cyclists. But I have read the draft copy (can't find the link now), and it seemed they were well aware of the wording, and to make sure cyclists were not included. I could not believe they have rewritten it now to explicitly include cyclists.

As for this "unenforceable" nonsense reason for not even having the law. I do not believe it will be enforced and that the majority of people passing close than 1.5m will be done. People said the smoking ban would not be enforced, and it is actually not, most pubs I go to in dublin have technically illegal smoking areas (as they are no open enough), but the real goal of the law was successful. I do believe the law would see a huge reduction in "punishment passes", esp. by taxi drivers & bus drivers & other professional drivers who will have their jobs at risk, -and so not be willing to risk their livelihood & that of their family for such a stupid action with such massive risk and so little personal gain.

EDIT: found it.
Road Traffic (Minimum Passing Distance of Cyclists) Bill 2017

I think the department are saying that it should apply to both cyclists and motorists not that there's an error in the draft resulting in it erroneously applying to both.

Apparently cyclists passing within 1.5m of vehicles dangerous to the vehicle occupants.

Arcade_Tryer

Are they in effect trying to make filtering through traffic illegal? Either way. Idiots.

This desire by media and policy makers to create a false equivalency between bicycles and motor vehicles with regards to road safety needs to end immediately. It has become farcical, and will continue to do so for as long as it is allowed to happen.

Cookie_Monster

Chuchote wrote: »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/world/asia/china-beijing-dockless-bike-share.html?action=click&contentCollection=Health&module=Trending&version=Full&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article

China, bike share and bad manners (selected quotes, much snippage)

you see the same from Chinese tourists all over the globe, no respect for public or communal property at all, there have been several high profile arrests over damage,eg http://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2096657/chinese-tourist-destroys-three-swift-kicks-what-nature-took-3000

Seweryn wrote: »

Because cyclists put cars in danger while overtaking...

http://irishcycle.com/2017/09/03/1-5m-law-would-apply-to-bicycles-overtaking-cars-claim-officials/

It sort of makes sense in certain conditions, I'd like to see a recognition that cyclists are given room to overtake parked cars by the 1.5m gap to avoid getting doored for example but that's about the extent of it.

Chuchote

More us-and-them writing from the Indo:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cyclists-the-big-winners-as-measures-squeeze-drivers-36100802.html

Cyclists the big winners as measures squeeze drivers

Conor Feehan
September 5 2017 2:30 AM

Cyclists are proving to be the real winners since new traffic measures were introduced on Dublin's quays in recent weeks.
With two bus lanes now making less room for drivers on the north quays, many feared the end result would be tailbacks and gridlock. And while many motorists have complained that their journey times are taking longer since the new layout was introduced, others say time spent in traffic has improved if anything.
The new changes came into effect on August 20 to coincide with the Luas Cross City tram testing and to ensure the permanent changes have time to bed down before regular day time tram testing starts this month.

Brendan O'Brien, Head of Technical Services, Transport, Dublin City Council said these changes were part of an overall commitment by Dublin City Council and the National Transport Authority (NTA) to improve mobility in the city as Dublin expands and the number of commuters steadily rises. "The additional bus lanes will alleviate the difficulties faced by public transport on the quays, where the worst delays for buses in the city are experienced," he said.
"At the peak morning time of 8am to 9am, over 7,000 people travel along the north quays on buses. This compares to around 500 cars and the same number of cyclists," he added.

The last quote in the piece makes nonsense of the division:

Motorists who joined the quays at Christchurch said it takes around 15 minutes to get to O'Connell Bridge. "That's about the same as it used to be before they made the changes. I think less people are using the quays to commute now and that has helped," said one driver.

Pinch Flat

Chuchote wrote: »

The last quote in the piece makes nonsense of the division:

And of course once everyone else realizes this, the quays will grind to a halt again.

Never underestimate Dublin driver logic. My local railway station brought in charging, about 6 or 7 years ago from memory. Big hoo ha at the time. A lot of people drive - maybe a max of 1km - to park and get a train to the city. When I said this to one of my neighbours (she lives perhaps 600m from the station, which she drives to and from daily), the reaction was "sure, there's less people parking now which is great news for me, easier to get a space". It soon reverted to being a mess, with long lines of people queuing for a place in a car park that they could walk to in perhaps 15 minutes.

magicbastarder

speaking of railway station parking, any experience i have heard of people cycling to the station has not been positive. one friend borrowed an old junker to cycle to coolmine station - and it was stolen on the first day he used it.

tomasrojo

When it comes to cinemas, train stations and the like -- places where people who enter are likely to be gone for hours at a time -- I try to park the bike nearby but not in the official parking area. Not always possible, but thieves love longer-term bike parking.

tomasrojo

From what I understand, bus users are the big winners from the new layout?

magicbastarder

shh. don't disrupt the narrative.

tomasrojo

Ahem. I meant to say: it's political correctness gone mad!

average_runner

tomasrojo wrote: »

From what I understand, bus users are the big winners from the new layout?

Its too early to tell yet, traffic is still light. Let's see how it all works once the luas is up and running.
The indo jumped the gun here by 3/4 months

Grassey

THE DECISION ON a new 2.7km cycle route between Clontarf and Dublin city centre has been delayed after a successful campaign to save the majority of old trees along Fairview Park meant the plans for the route had to be altered.

Click


*just don't read the comments.....

Fian

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cyclists-the-big-winners-as-measures-squeeze-drivers-36100802.html

Headline clearly designed to spur a below the line reaction - "cyclists the big winners as drivers squeezed"

From the comments:

When will laws be passed to shoot cyclists on sight? Not only are they a bloody nuisance, and a total hazard on the roads, they think they own the roads, courtsey of the road tax users who are gouged for compulsory insurance NCT and road tax, while these arrogant cyclists do what they want without so much as 1 cent being paid.Get rid of them or tax them to death like car owners re ....

magicbastarder

don cockburn has died - the reason i mention it is this little oddity in his wikipedia entry:

His one eccentricity was that he cycled to RTÉ's Montrose Studios every day.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Cockburn

monument

magicbastarder wrote: »

don cockburn has died - the reason i mention it is this little oddity in his wikipedia entry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Cockburn

"His one eccentricity was that he cycled to RTs Montrose Studios every day.[3]"

Will somebody please add the same note to the profiles of Cathal MacCoille and Brian Dobson?

monument

Chuchote wrote: »

The film Bikes vs Cars is available in full to watch till tomorrow (Sunday 3 September) - French subs, though a lot of it is in English:

http://www.telerama.fr/monde/regardez-bikes-vs-cars,-le-documentaire-militant-pro-velo-de-fredrik-gertten,n5181801.php?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#link_time=1504259982

Chris Boardman says cycling in cities is too dangerous for him:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/31/chris-boardman-riding-a-bike-on-uk-roads-feels-too-dangerous-for-me

Chuchote wrote: »

Bikes vs Cars with English-language subs here:

https://greenpeacefilmfestival.org/en/les-films/edition-2017/les-films-en-competition-2017/energie/bikes-vs-cars/

It's on Netflix too:

https://www.netflix.com/title/80075312

Chuchote

Fian wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cyclists-the-big-winners-as-measures-squeeze-drivers-36100802.html

Headline clearly designed to spur a below the line reaction - "cyclists the big winners as drivers squeezed"

From the comments:

Quote:
When will laws be passed to shoot cyclists on sight? Not only are they a bloody nuisance, and a total hazard on the roads, they think they own the roads, courtsey of the road tax users who are gouged for compulsory insurance NCT and road tax, while these arrogant cyclists do what they want without so much as 1 cent being paid.Get rid of them or tax them to death like car owners re ...

I hope this has been reported as hate speech, and if the newspaper doesn't take it down, taken to the Gardaí to report that the site is hosting hate speech.

wannabecraig

Chuchote wrote: »

I hope this has been reported as hate speech, and if the newspaper doesn't take it down, taken to the Gardaí to report that the site is hosting hate speech.

Because then it's an us against them, which we all want to avoid. Look at the replies to the comment and you'll see that its better to let them talk and expose their own stupidity and small mindedness.

buffalo

Chuchote wrote: »

I hope this has been reported as hate speech, and if the newspaper doesn't take it down, taken to the Gardaí to report that the site is hosting hate speech.

Have you reported it yet?

HivemindXX

Chuchote wrote: »

I hope this has been reported as hate speech, and if the newspaper doesn't take it down, taken to the Gardaí to report that the site is hosting hate speech.

Maybe it's just Michael O'Leary having another one of his little 'jokes'.

Try not to dwell too much on the fact the psychotic idiot that posted that comment may be driving alongside you at some point.

Chuchote

wannabecraig wrote: »

Because then it's an us against them, which we all want to avoid. Look at the replies to the comment and you'll see that its better to let them talk and expose their own stupidity and small mindedness.

No. Hate speech should be reported as hate speech.

Ignoring it didn't work in Spain in the 1930s, in Germany in the 1930s, in Rwanda in the 1990s, etc, etc.

wannabecraig

Chuchote wrote: »

No. Hate speech should be reported as hate speech.

Ignoring it didn't work in Spain in the 1930s, in Germany in the 1930s, in Rwanda in the 1990s, etc, etc.

Try reporting every tool on an open forum and see how much of your time is taken up by it.

Pinch Flat

I replied to that commmet that it may be an idea to psychologically profile people before they were left behind the wheel of a large vehicle that can cause mayhem if not used properly, but for some reason it wasn't published..... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Chuchote

wannabecraig wrote: »

Try reporting every tool on an open forum and see how much of your time is taken up by it.

Not every tool talks about shooting people.