BBC accused of “dogged determination to demonise e-bikes” after cyclist injured in cycle lane crash claims “recklessly driven e-bikes are a far bigger danger” than drivers; Telegraph columnist slams e-bike “pests” – including mums + more on the live blog

Another week, another questionably worded BBC report about ‘e-bikes’. I’m sensing something of a pattern emerging here.

Last Monday, you may remember, Callum reported on this very live blog that Auntie Beeb’s news team came in for criticism after erroneously describing an illegal, high-speed bike user, stopped by police, as “an e-bike driver”. No mention of EAPCs, 15.5mph cut-offs, e-bike law, nothing.

> BBC criticised for reporting police apprehending “e-bike driver” without mentioning the machine was illegal

Well, this week, they’re at it again.

Yesterday, the BBC published an interview with Morwenna Hughes, a cyclist who was seriously injured in a collision on a two-way cycle lane in Hammersmith in June. Morwenna suffered facial injuries in the crash and may not regain full mobility in her left arm.

Hughes, a cyclist in London for the past 25 years, says the incident happened so fast she couldn’t tell what kind of ‘e-bike’ the person who hit her was riding.

Nevertheless, she told the BBC that e-bikes should be subject to registration (though, as we point out all the time, if an illegal or modified bike was involved, it has to be registered and licensed to be used on the road).

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC London (@bbclondon)

And according to Hughes, ‘e-bikes’ (presumably of all legal stripes) are now a bigger danger to cyclists on the road than motorists, despite 60 of the 79 crashes which killed a cyclist in the UK last year involving a driver, and two involving another person on a bike.

(While cyclist deaths dropped again in 2025, the number of people on bikes injured increased sharply by 14 per cent. However, when we asked the Department for Transport, it said there is currently no way of finding out how many of these collisions and incidents involved electric motorbikes and illegally modified e-bikes.)

> Serious crashes involving cyclists up by 14% but number of cycling fatalities falls once again on UK roads, new government figures reveal

“I’m a huge fan of cycling and I’m an advocate for getting people on bikes,” Hughes said.

“But this has really shaken my confidence both as a cyclist but also as a pedestrian. And just being even a pedestrian in busy areas where there’s e-bikes around, I feel very anxious.

“Up until maybe a year ago, cars always felt like the biggest danger to me. But I think in the last year, I definitely feel that recklessly driven e-bikes are a far bigger danger to cyclists.

“And it feels like it is just increasing. So I do feel like it has got progressively worse over the last few months to the point now where in some parts of my commute, I feel like you’re almost outnumbered by e-bikes.”

But what kind of e-bikes? This is where the BBC’s report doesn’t really help when it comes to clarifying things.

Take this section, for instance, which manages to link illegally modified, high-speed bikes, legally classed as motorcycles, with legal hire bikes.

Hospitals have reported an increase in injuries to both riders and pedestrians.

Legal e-bikes can only go 15.5mph but many are illegally tampered with or “chipped” to go much faster and should technically be classed as motorbikes.

As first reported on BBC London, Jane Ouartsi was hit by a minor riding a Lime bike.

The impact was very serious and long lasting. She suffered a broken femur, a fractured collar bone and two spinal fractures requiring three operations.

Meanwhile, Hughes also reckons the proliferation of Lime, Forest, and Voi e-bikes in London have contributed to the rise of reckless riding.

“If people are renting Lime bikes or Forest bikes, they’re paying by the minute,” she said.

“I understand they might want to get to their destination as quickly as possible but there are so many people cycling recklessly and because they are unaccountable for their reckless cycling.”

> Hire e-bikes to feature ‘number plates’ to clamp down on dangerous cycling and ‘problematic’ parking – and ban repeat offenders

In a statement to the BBC, buried near the bottom of the story, the London Cycling Campaign’s Tom Fyans pointed out that all-important distinction between legal e-bikes and their high-speed, illegal counterparts.

”Legal e-bikes help get loads more people cycle who never would have otherwise – with all the benefits to health, climate, pollution and yes reducing road danger these bring,” Fyans said.

“But we need to tackle the illegal bikes and ensure every road user, cyclist or not, obeys the Highway Code, to keep us all safe.”

> E-bike confusion harming shops, as owner claims illegal bike owners “aggressive” when refused service

Fyans’ helpful quote, however, wasn’t enough to prevent the BBC from getting another healthy dose of criticism for their reporting on all things e-bike.

“You never see this kind of anguish about drivers and cars do you?” Gaz wrote on BlueSky. “Cyclists say recklessly ridden and illegally souped up cars have become a danger to them on the capital’s bike lanes and roads.

“But then it’s the BBC and their dogged determination to demonise e-bikes.”

“You mean e-motorcyclist right, not e-bike rider, two different things!” noted Tony on Facebook.

Jack Fifield added: “BBC London posts a video where someone injured by an e-bike rider (type of e-bike, whether legal or illegal, unspecified) says the danger from e-bikes is greater than cars.

“No stats presented to show that this is demonstrably false. The BBC’s shoddy reporting is leading to more dangerous roads.”

“Without invalidating the experience of this person, this certainly isn’t universal,” Anton argued on Instagram. “Let’s remember that for every serious injury caused by an e-bike this year there are very approximately 30 caused by motor vehicles.

“I find it odd this account is silent on those. I wouldn’t object to tracking and publicising these rates more carefully, but for the love of god can we have some journalism?”

Same time, same place next week, alright?

It’s going to be one of those days, isn’t it?

Not to be outdone by Auntie, the big wigs at the Telegraph decided this morning that 37 hours (give or take a few minutes) was clearly long enough without an anti-cycling or e-bike story appearing on their illustrious web pages.

So, they commissioned their cyclist hater-in-chief Celia Walden to get in on the act.

Walden, you may recall, penned that infamous, poorly timed tirade against cyclists back in 2011, when she described people on bikes as “plugged in their iPods, calmly humming ‘lalalalala’ along to Sasha Distel, as that articulated lorry indicates left” – in the same week a London cyclist was killed by a HGV driver with a faulty indicator turning left into her path.

> Lorry that killed Paula Jurek had faulty indicator inquest told – CPS dropped case against driver

Yes, that Celia Walden.

In May, Walden (the daughter of one of Margaret Thatcher’s ministers) also popped up on this live blog after she accused “red light flouting” cyclists of “terrorising children and the elderly”.

So, who does she have it out for this time? Well, kids on Lime bikes and mums on the school run, apparently.

In her latest column, titled ‘Failure to act on e-bikes is now wilful negligence’, Walden doesn’t even pull off the BBC trick and confuse legal and illegal e-bikes – in fact, it’s the legal ones she’s concerned about. Or the “reckless pavement pests”, as she calls them.

“I live near a busy high street, where at least once a week I’ll be forced to dodge everyone from 10-year-old boys racing each other on Lime Bikes outside Waitrose to entitled middle-aged mums careering along at twice the speed of traffic on pretty, higher-end models,” she writes.

“You know the ones, they’re deceptively dainty, styled like old-fashioned pushbikes, but look down at the wheels (coming straight at you) and they’re as thick as those on motorbikes.”

Hmmm… Turns out Walden is a bit confused, after all. I told you it’s going to be a long day.

> Police oppose new cycle lane amid fears of “a highway for illegal e-bikes on drug runs” – but council insists area will be safer and avoid “mania” of local roads