Live blog – S Wales Police boss to meet Cardiff cyclists, Track World Cup for London, and more
All today’s news from the site and beyond
Mon, Feb 12, 2018 15:00
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
19 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Rendel Harris 8 minutes ago
@kinderje Are you aware that -ise endings are actually the newer form, having supplanted -ize (as used by Shakespeare, the King James Bible and Jane Austen, amongst many others) in the mid 19th century? Etymologically there is a far better argument for -ize endings for words with Greek and Latin roots than the -ise ending which arose from Victorian publishers imitating French verb endings. Both endings are now regarded as acceptable in British English, although the Oxford style guide recommends -ize. It is most certainly not incorrect.
mdavidford 16 minutes ago
@Backladder Given that the makers are selling it as being useable on any ride on open roads, it doesn't seem unreasonable to try to test it in those conditions.
mdavidford 19 minutes ago
'Leasting'? That's a whole 4 letters less.
mdavidford 23 minutes ago
Although usually the easiest thing of all would be for them just to stop for a few moments while you cycle past them (which requires a lot less space to do safely than them passing you), but most people seem allergic to stopping, even for the briefest time.
mark1a 58 minutes ago
@Backladder Oh I think I can guess - the nearest indoor velodrome to road.cc HQ looks to be some distance away in Wales, whereas Odd Down Cycle Track (where this test was conducted) is just 2 miles away.
Cugel 1 hour ago
There are a number of causes of "the divide between motorists and cyclists". Only one is to do with the technology (of bicycles and cars) and that's the nature of the car, which is designed to induce the sort of dangerous and careless behaviours that providing humans with a lot of power and glamour fetches out of us. Other causes are much more insidious - A culture of hyper-individualism bordering on solipsism, with violently ultra-selfish and aggressive anti-heroes being promoted in every mass media channel as the ideal. A "news" media that overwhelmingly seeks, creates and offers pariahs and scapegoats to the rabid individualists, which pariahs and scapegoats includes all kinds of those perceived as less powerful and therefore easy victims, including cyclists. The near complete lack of any curb upon the dangerous antics of vast numbers of media-maddened motorists by the forces of law and order, many of whom are actually members themselves of the mass media maddened motorist ilk. ******** No amount of a more rational discourse about active travel or the means of making it safer will change these root causes of the vast numbers of deaths and maiming due to inept, incompetent and deliberately violent antics of vast numbers of motorists allowed their dangerous "weapons of choice". Yet many other highly damaging aspects of modern societies would be solved by a much more effective curbing of mass media mob-building and goading along with a serious attempt to prevent motorists and a whole range of other damagers from behaving as badly as so many do. It'll not happen, of course. Large and powerful elements of the modern world obtain far too much ultra-riches and power from current conditions for them to allow any significant change. And vast numbers of the population have long had their minds, attitudes and behaviours captured and directed by various oligarchical monsters and their mass media propaganda horns. About the only chance of safe active travel becoming extant is for the population at large to become mostly too poor to afford a car, ironically one other likely outcome of the machinations of those same power and money-mad monsters that have created the car-issue in the first place. Their need for zero-sum socio-economic arrangements degrades everything, including the wallet-contents of the masses.
Rendel Harris 1 hour ago
@Astralstroll The hierarchy of road users does not mean priority of road users except in certain circumstances, e.g. stopping to let pedestrians cross junctions before turning. It doesn't mean that cyclists have priority over motor vehicles at all times any more than the pedestrians have priority over cyclists at all times. It certainly doesn't mean that you have priority in the circumstances you describe; personally, unless the driver is being a complete dick, on a narrow country lane I accept that it is easier for me to turn around and go back to the nearest passing place, which is never that far if you're on a bike, than for a tractor or other large vehicle to reverse back down the road for my benefit.
Backladder 1 hour ago
If you were spending that much money on the device the obvious thing to do is to book a couple of hours in a velodrome for testing in a stable environment, I can't understand why Road.cc tried to do it outdoors.
wtjs 2 hours ago
@Astralstroll The Hierarchy of Road Users, announced with great fanfares in 2022, has been rendered into complete fiction by the attitude of the police: there is this hierarchy/ priority list but we don't take it seriously and if drivers ignore it we don't care! The same applies to the ludicrous notice of close-passing - No KSI'd cyclist = No Offence ttps://upride.cc/incident/lwa190_minicooper_hierarchy/
19 thoughts on “Live blog – S Wales Police boss to meet Cardiff cyclists, Track World Cup for London, and more”
The BBC is organisationally
The BBC is organisationally biased against cycling, with negative stories outweighing positive ones probably 50:1.
It isn’t as if there aren’t any positive stories, with the recent NICE report, and many dozens of others over the years, all extolling the virtues of cycling and how it is the answer to modern diseases, pollution and congestion. Mentions on the BBC? 0. If this had been walking or some unproven medical procedure, they are all over it.
I mostly listen to R4 and cycling is only mentioned to criticise it, tell us how dangerous it is, and how lawless cyclists are. There is no programme about cycling, but walking seems to feature every day.
Then there’s helmets. The BBC has been unashamedly running a propaganda campaign for the past thirty years promoting them, in the process breaking every rule in their own Editorial Guidelines, but despite overwhelming evidence, complaints are dismissed with a condescending wave of the hand.
burtthebike wrote:
Actually there is…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02pcb42/episodes/downloads
kevvjj wrote:
That’s R5, not R4.
burtthebike wrote:
Surely we are not judging the BBC on radio 4 alone? If we are accusing them of institutional bias then surely we need to look at the ‘institution’.
kevvjj wrote:
I can only judge them on what I see and hear, nobody could watch and listen to their entire output, and my experience is that there is incredible bias.
burtthebike wrote:
I think it’s pretty clear where the bias lies.
burtthebike wrote:
I recently complained about a ‘cycle helmet saved my life’ video report on the BBC and (eventually after 3 week delays) received just such condescending dismissals from management. I am afraid I gave up in the face of stonewalling, and their unwillingness to engage in a rational discussion.
This is it – I can understand the sentiment from the close family, but the lack of research of such an implausible claim by the so-called ‘journalist’, and the complete lack of balance appalled me.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/42345928/girl-says-cycle-helmets-should-be-compulsory
No Sweat wrote:
Don’t give up! I and others complained about this very story and are taking it further. It doesn’t take much, just drop an email to ecu@bbc.co.uk, the editorial complaints unit, explaining that they have yet again broken every rule in their own Editorial Guidelines. When enough people complain, they might just change; they won’t if we don’t.
burtthebike wrote:
..probably not.
Quite a few – go have a search on their site, it’s quite easy to do.
I mostly listen to R4 and cycling is only mentioned to criticise it, tell us how dangerous it is, and how lawless cyclists are. There is no programme about cycling, but walking seems to feature every day.— burtthebike
Program dealt with further up, there’s also a dedicated cycling section – which is primarily sporting to be fair, but is prominant and active. Stories of walking and health every day ? No, not really – again, seem a few on the health benefits of walking, cycling and exercise in general but really can’t see some massive discrepency. Also think about the amount of people who walk and the amount that cycle as well, even in the heydays of cycling as transport.
For me, must be a fairly shite “propoganda campaign” if i’ve not noticed it – the occassional usual rubbish remark about helmets and general cycling safety, but hardly pushing it let alone a campaign… You having a bad Monday by any chance ?
fukawitribe wrote:
Not my fault if you aren’t very observant.
When I complained about the institutional bias in the BBC, I provided a list of over 40 programmes and articles which a brief search found, only one of which was even vaguely balanced, all the rest overtly promoted helmets.
This complaint was, of course, dismissed, with the observation that I hadn’t provided enough evidence. So I did a slightly deeper search and found over 80 articles, and again, I could only find a single one which was balanced. This complaint was dismissed on the grounds that they had dismissed my previous complaint.
Biased? Not much.
burtthebike wrote:
Maybe I don’t watch much television or spend that much time on their website digging through articles – I did, however, have a quick search before I posted and of the 20-30 articles I scanned I didn’t see the ‘institutional bias’ you claimed, or any really apart the odd ‘helmet saved my life’ click-bait. No systemic promotion of helmets, or guideline breaking propoganda; perhaps you could send me a copy (or post here) of the list of articles you sent – that might be useful. Also, perhaps you could reply to the point about there being zero mentions that link cycling to health on the BBC. Cheers
fukawitribe wrote:
I’ll just give you a couple of examples.
R4 has a programme “More or Less” which claims to debunk the modern myths by using actual data, and to be fair, they usually do. After I suggested that they look at cycle helmets, they did an article on them, and for the first and only time in the prog’s history, they didn’t look at any data, they just presented opinions. They did interview three people, two were helmet zealots and one was neutral, no opposing opinion. The programme’s presenter made his views absolutely clear, something prohibited by their Editorial Guidelines. Complaints of bias dismissed.
Then there was the coverage of the James Cracknell affair. The BBC’s Editorial Guidelines have strict rules about featuring someone who is being sponsored by a manufacturer. Cracknell was sponsored by the helmet manufacturer, but this was never mentioned in any interview that I saw. Complaints dismissed.
Just google for “BBC cycle helmet” and you’ll find dozens of helmet saved my life stories, none of which point out that it is all assumption and has no basis in fact, and with no contrary opinions. The Editorial Guidelines specify that there must be balance, contrary opinions and facts.
There are constant calls for helmet laws, and in such cases of proposed legislation, the Editorial Guidelines become even stricter, except not in the case of cycle helmets, and they just keep refusing to feature data or contrary opinions.
It’s been going on for thirty years, with the R4 prog You and Yours featuring BHIT, with no contrary opinions or facts, that long ago.
As I’ve explained, I can’t watch/listen to all BBC output, but what I do see/hear doesn’t feature the overwhelming benefits of cycling to the individual and society or the facts about helmets.
BeSpoke is a Radio 5 podcast.
BeSpoke is a Radio 5 podcast. It’s great, but it’s not on Radio 4, and it’s about racing not everyday cycling.
I’m not usually into ‘Beeb
I’m not usually into ‘Beeb bashing’, but it seems to be the case that if they have the rights to show something, it’s the best thing going, if they don’t then it hardly gets a mention. Unless of course it’s a doping/abuse story then Dan Roan is all over it.
Recent example of this – NFL. Endless tweets and space on the BBC Sport website for Superbowl. I was glad when it was over, so we could go back to not giving a flying shite about it.
Rubbish, the Beeb has had
Rubbish, the Beeb has had some great coverage of events I’d have never got to watch otherwise.
Also – Jeremy Vine.
DrJDog wrote:
The BBC may well cover individual events, but everyday cycling is ignored, despite the overwhelming evidence of its incredible benefits for society in health, congestion, pollution and sustainability terms. As I’ve previously said, R4 seems to have a prog about walking every day, but never mentions cycling except to criticise it.
burtthebike wrote:
I’ve listened to “Ramblings with Claire Balding”. What other programmes are there about walking on R4? not trying to be awkward – i’m genuinely interested!
Deeferdonk wrote:
I’ve listened to “Ramblings with Claire Balding”. What other programmes are there about walking on R4? not trying to be awkward – i’m genuinely interested!
[/quote]
To be honest, I can’t remember, I just register that they are talking about walking again, contrasted with the fact that they never mention cycling.
Gardening is apparently worth £5bn to the economy, while cycling was worth £2.9bn in 2010, but gardening gets its own much repeated R4 prog, while cycling gets nothing except criticism. Cycling is increasingly popular, but the BBC just ignores it at best, and at worst, seems to want to destroy it.
On that Australian article,
On that Australian article, presumably that’s why there were signs on every bike stand within a couple of hundred metres of Bristol’s main war memorial on the Centre a day each side of last year’s Remembrance ceremony thing, saying you couldn’t park here?