Ned Boulting: media coverage of red-light jumping Lycra wearers is 'dull'

"The majority ain't too smart, and they're all in cars."

So said nowasps three days ao. That must mean that the minority are smart, and aren't in cars. And who are the minority? We have to assume that they're cyclists! So all cyclists are smart. I've seen some in London who are definitely not in the 'smart' bracket.

Apparently 'hordes of cyclists have made country lanes no go areas for cars' in  Angela Epsteins reaction piece in the Telegraph  today. This point is illustrated by a photo of what I think is the 2011 World Champs in Denmark with what looks like  Cav in the middle of the  second row. Yes it ridiculous, it's also lazy shoddy and irresponsible to illustrate such statements With inappropriate and irrelevant pictures . Tweet her yourselves @adepstein1

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/11940680/Why-do-cyc...

Angela Epstein comes across in the interview on Radio 4 and in the Daily Mail column article that ron611087 kindly linked as an extremely self centred individual who just like the eponymous Mr Toad cannot see beyond the end of the bonnet of her beloved motor car. 'Get off the road cyclists, you are in my way'.

Unfortunately she represents very many self entitled and selfish people with her 'I drive my children 1/2 a mile to school every morning because I can' attitude, with no regard to the congestion her car creates, the pollution that she generates for others to breath, the danger she represents to others due to her primary interest in chatting to the passenger, listening to music and singing along rather than concentrating on driving and even the freely given admission that she has on more than one occassion almost run over school children crossing the road in front of her. Although rather than admit her failure to observe, anticipate and just bloody well pay attention to what is going on outside the 'cosy.. hermetically sealed' interior of her car, she blames the children and their parents for their poor road crossing skills. I presume she has zero comprehension of the blind spot danger zones her own car creates as she kisses her daughter goodbye. Maybe she is one of those morons who considers the yellow zig zag lines the perfect place to stop (but it's only for a few moments, so that's OK) to unload the offspring before driving away at high speed, weaving between the other stationary school run cars whilst sending a text message because she is now running late for work and it's only polite to let the office know. But that would be to tar all the ever so busy school run Mums with the same brush just because some behave that way.

So yes Ms Epstein, cyclists do feel a sense of entitlement to use the road because 1. We damn well pay for it with our taxes, and 2. We have just as much right to use it as car drivers, lorries, horse riders, motorcyclists, farmer Giles in his tractor, joggers, pedestrians and pretty much everyone else. If you cannot drive with due regard and courtesy to all these other road users and with an awareness of the particular characteristics of their modes of transport, then frankly you should not be given the privilege of holding a driving license.

I think I genuinely hate this rather stupid woman and everything she stands for.

There are 'good' and 'bad' motorists, cyclists, pedestrians...whatever.

This daft need to demonise one group at the expense of another is pointless and, to my mind, not very bright. Well said Ned!

Someone needs to point out to  Angela Epstien that cyclists are accountable as any other road user, there's no special dispensation. That they don't carry registration plates is because they aren't in charge of a vehicle weighing +1500+ kg with an internal combustion engine. Not that a registration plate makes drivers any more accountable, given the number of recorded hit and runs.

She also fails to back her opintion up with any evidence. Her assertion that one red light jumper could have catestrophic consequences is pure speculation. More cyclists are killed by motorists jumping lights than by cyclists jumping lights themselves.

With her 1/2 mile school run, perhaps Angela Epstein should recognise that she's part of the problem not part of the solution. http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/family/i-drive-my-children-half-a-mile...

So the interests of hundreds of people legally riding up and down Box Hill is less important than that of a few car driving locals? I must have missed that memo...

The average age of a Radio 4 listerner is 55.  For a talk show on a Sunday morning, it's probably about 70!

I wouldn't be concerned about this shows ability to influence anyone, their views will already be firmly entrenched.  It is another one that can be added to the growing catalogue of bad media handling of the subject.

One I would draw this site's attention to, is Nick Ferrari the morning presenter on LBC.  He regularly criticises cycling policy in London, and keeps raising the issue of forcing cyclists to use cycle lanes when he interviews the mayoral candidates.  That's a policy of his own which he is using his position to try and popularise in the run up to an election.  There's not even the pretence of the presenter being impartial.

"That's the trouble with jews, they all break international law, are self rightous and judgemental of all other peoples." No, not right is it Ms Epstein? In fact such a statement would be unacceptable to any fair minded person who knows that writing off a whole section of any society is utterly repugnant.  "I don't like cyclists" and "I don't like jews" is the same side of a very shitty coin.

Would Ms Epstein find it acceptable for a 'commentator' to state that "I see black people jumping red lights every day and they are not accountable in law"? Idle narrow minded stereotyping of cyclists seems to be acceptable in some sections of the media because they know they can't get away with it in relation to ethnic minorities and gay people.

The Telegraph  is in a death spiral - editorially and financially. Of course they are going for clickbait opinions. Why the BBC has to play along is anyone's guess. 

Oh the irony, here's a picture of her driving on a motorway in the pissing wet rain but filming it on her mobile!

https://twitter.com/adepstein1/status/651684963604164609

Doesn't all this clap-trap spoken by anti-cyclists apply ten-fold to cars and drivers?

Everyday I see lots going through on red, speeding, littering, acting with hostility, being selfish,  more speeding, showing self-entitlement, using phones, breaking as many laws as they can get away with, speeding etc. etc.

What damage can a 2 tonne vehicle do compared to me on a bike?

This is why drivers are licensed and cyclists are not.

Ergo, lorry drivers are even more stringently licensed, as they can do more harm.

P.S. I drive and cycle.

It's almost self-fulfilling though isn't it?

When road.cc post a picture of Chris Boardman in relation to a news article about Copenhagen or advocacy and the first thing everyone does? Moan about him not wearing a helmet. Point well missed people!

Even cyclists argue about it and will do so at great length citing all sorts of bollocks about someone they knew who once fell off because he's a bit rubbish and his helmet "definitely saved him" therefore everyone should wear one. And before you know it a balanced, well-meaning article that carries a sensible message gets swamped with shite.

Remember a few years ago in London when 6 cyclists were killed in the space of about 10 days? Before you knew it, Boris and the media had successfully diverted the topic specifically onto wearing earphones, RLJing, no hi-viz... And everyone went with it. Classic diversionary tactics.

Even the Police do it when tweeting about accidents. "Cyclist hit by bus, serious leg injuries. May we remind all cyclists to wear helmets".

The debate needs people like Ned, Chris B and others to drag it away from this obsession with helmets and hi-viz. road.cc could do it's part by deleting all the helmet arguments on here for starters!

Well done Ned.

It's the BBC's job to represent the establishment, and please the majority. The majority ain't too smart, and they're all in cars.

"Residents too scared to drive on Sunday's because the roads are so packed with people on bikes"?? Well, now they know how some cyclists feel for the other six days of the week.

Actually I live about a mile from Box Hill and I generally choose not to cycle round there on the weekend because it does get a bit busy ...

To be honest, this debate is going round in circles in my opinion - cyclists get the raw deal as "we don't pay road tax" and are still in the minority compared with motorists despite the recent surge of cycling in the UK. At the end of the day, the road infrastructure is decades behind nations such as Holland and Denmark and will be for some time. There's always going to be idiots out there - some walk, some cycle and some drive cars, lorries and vans - is it too much to ask for some tolerance and mutual respect?!?

She & her husband don't cycle on the roads....well there is the crux of her argument...she doesn't "have to put up with motorists"...so how can she have an opinion...and call out cyclists as being overly (self) righteous...she states that her husband isn't that type of cyclist, because he doesn't uses the road...never? ever? she has not witnessed his behaviour is more likely...good auld Ned...I think that discussion was won morally be the 'cyclists' camp.

Bright lights...use them/don't use them...make up yer minds...

Re Angela Epstein's comments about licensing, MOT, and number plates - yeah, cos that works so well for catching RLJing motorists, motorists speeding, motorists doing all those other things they're not supposed to...

It was quite amusing, the columnist denounced all cyclists whilst also claiming to be one herself. The argument about cyclists not having any legal accountability is also perplexing given that someone getting on a bicycle doesn't suddenly become beyond the law.

Does the BBC want cyclists to continue paying the licence fee? You do have to wonder where the balance and impartiality is in some of the peices, or being less charitable, why the incitement. 

PS you have to love the comment, using bright lights! Well WTF, use lights, don't use lights motorists are never happy!