Government publish official updated guidelines; Box Hill bike shop claims telephoto lens antics forced closure; Brighton gets cycle lane on major A road; Will latest lockdown regs change our riding?; Uttrup Ludwig has a sh*t day + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Weekend catch-up
It’s not like you were going anywhere so there’s no excuse, but just in case here are all our news stories from the weekend anyway…
Road closures to be brought in to discourage school run drivers once lockdown lifts
Pedal Me, the e-cargo bike-based delivery service, warns Amazon: “We’re coming for you”
Met Police urges drivers to slow down after catching driver doing 110mph in a 30mph zone
Columnist says cyclists should “do something in return” for pop-up cycle lanes – Cycling UK responds
Simon Yates finding Zwift racing “bloody hard” (but he has an excuse)
Government announces £250m emergency active travel fund as part of £2bn investment
Yesterday's big announcement... all clear?
— realmattlucas (@RealMattLucas) May 10, 2020
This is one way of putting it anyway.
Firefighter finishes 'Indoor Deca' triathlon... and averages over 24mph for final 112 mile ride
49-year-old Joe Duckworth – an airport firefighter from Lancashire – completed perhaps the toughest lockdown challenge of the lot yesterday when he clocked his tenth and final Ironman in ten days, in support of NHS Charities Together.
Mr Duckworth swapped the usual 2.4 mile swim portion of the Ironman triathlon for one hour on a rowing machine – equivalent to how long the swim portion would take him in the real world – followed by a 112 mile static bike and 26.6 mile marathon, every day for 10 days. He logged into Zwift for each ride, with a growing number of followers virtually riding with him throughout the week.
According to his daughters speaking to the Chorley Guardian, Mr Duckworth is a regular long-distance triathlon competitor but spent most of 2019 out with a knee injury, using the indoor Deca challenge as his ‘comeback’ event.
The video above was one of the last on-bike videos posted on the 10 in 10 Deca Triathlon Facebook page before Duckworth went deep for days 9 and 10, clocking a 4hr 35min bike leg and 3hr 15min marathon on the final day.
Almost £13,000 has been raised at the time of writing – you can donate here.
The new lockdown guidelines - what does it mean for cyclists?
But to emphasise the basic point
It was *never* unlawful for a person in England to go out for unlimited exercise in the first place, if that was your genuine purpose
And so this one announced relaxation is legally illusory – just a change in guidance really
— David Allen Green (@davidallengreen) May 10, 2020
As explained in our article last night and the tweet above from lawyer and policy expert David Allen Green… well, not a lot really. There was no cap on the ‘daily exercise’ that was already permitted in England, and if you had have gone out for two bike rides in a day and got ‘caught’ then it would have been down to the courts to decide if you had a ‘reasonable excuse’; and exercise was considered a reasonable excuse in most circumstances.
The Prime Minister did say that from Wednesday, people will be allowed out to sit or sunbathe in parks, drive to take exercise or play sports with household members, which in theory could lead to increased footfall on cycle routes and more motor traffic on roads than there has been of late. In Wales the rules haven’t changed, and their lockdown does enforce a ‘once per day’ exercise limit – that means cyclists who ride over the border could still be in breach of the rules. Scotland have stuck with the ‘stay at home’ message, but have removed their once-per-day exercise limit as of today.
The government's lockdown exit plan is really just a stage profile
Cyclist go weeeeeeeeeee pic.twitter.com/rvyiDkWb2R
— . (@twlldun) May 10, 2020
Let’s hope the descent continues. And we manage to jump over all the obstacles…
Fixed it: pic.twitter.com/ztiw991299
— Ben Cooper (@bencooper) May 10, 2020
Cecilie Uttrup Ludwig is brought some good luck
This must be my “lucky” day!💩🍀😜😉🤣 pic.twitter.com/HRGDCrXwnx
— Cecilie Uttrup Ludwig (@CUttrupLudwig) May 9, 2020
In the form of a bird emptying its bowels on her expensive sunglasses. The Dane has made quite a name for herself for her hugely entertaining and excitable post-race interviews – she’s still just 24 and is doing pretty good at the old cycling right now, but when she eventually retires, hopefully a career in the media awaits as the world deserves it.
Cycling: the world's biggest tax avoidance scheme
I’m surprised more rich and powerful people aren’t interested in cycling – from what I read on Twitter, it’s the perfect tax avoidance scheme
— Hannah 🚲 (rage ➡️ watts) (@theeyecollector) May 10, 2020
Basically cyclists don’t any pay tax, so you might as well stop paying any to the council and amend your monthly wages… right?
The lockdown 'step-by-step' plan spoofs keep on coming
— musttryharder (@musttryharder4) May 10, 2020
This has to be our favourite so far, in reply to comedian Nish Kumar’s interpretation.
A new bike is always the start of something beautiful...
The beginning of something beautiful… pic.twitter.com/JiXnYGGyZR
— Ash Sarkar (@AyoCaesar) May 11, 2020
…should probably add pedals before the journey begins though!
Will yesterdays' government announcement change your lockdown riding routine?
Bearing in mind some members of the public appeared to interpret the lockdown rules incorrectly – with inflammatory signs and road graffiti spotted telling cyclists to ‘go home’ amongst other things – will you now feel more comfortable riding outside knowing that Boris Johnson clearly said unlimited exercise is now ok? Take part in our poll and let us know in the comments if your riding will change at all.
The UK awaits written document of government's latest lockdown guidance
I wish the Government released the written guidance just after the PM’s speech.
It could have avoided a morning of confusion.
It’s due soon so let’s see. Lots of questions to answer, especially on seeing loved ones.
I hope it sheds some light.
— Professor Karol Sikora (@ProfKarolSikora) May 11, 2020
Boris Johnson was accused by some of lacking clarity in last night’s address, and hopefully some of that could get cleared up when the written guidance is published at some point today. It’s unlikely anything knew will come to light regarding outdoor exercise – ‘unlimited outdoor exercise’ is one of the things that is pretty clear, fortunately.
Box Hill bike shop claims press photographers' telephoto lens antics forced them to close
My shop is closed because this very technique forced @nationaltrust to close the Box Hill Zig Zag. So it’s not just annoying, it’s crippling.
— Destination Bike (@DestinationBike) May 11, 2020
Over the bank holiday weekend, another image was doing the rounds in the tabloid press which appeared to show a huge group of cyclists in London gathered close together at a red light; however it’s been claimed that once again, a photography technique was used to make them look closer together than they really are.
Destination Bike – situated on Box Hill – claims media coverage that accused cyclists of flouting rules on the Surrey climb were to blame for the shop having to close, presumably due to a lack of trade. When the road was closed to all traffic last month Surrey Police did claim that ‘numerous’ cyclists on Box Hill were caught flouting social distancing rules, but the majority were sticking to the government guidelines.
First temporary cycle lane built on 'major dual carriageway' now open in Brighton
Great to see the temporary cycle lane on the (pleasingly empty) Old Shoreham Road this morning – let’s make it permanent @BrightonHoveCC. #CyclingForAll #COVID19 pic.twitter.com/Rg00gtiaNe
— Esther Gill (@Esther_Gill) May 11, 2020
The A270 Old Shoreham Road in Brighton has had 1.7 miles of cycle lane installed on either side, which The Argus claim is the first major dual carriageway to be repurposed with a cycle lane during the pandemic. Only one lane is now open to motor traffic on the section, with the council saying that temporary signs will line the road to ensure motorists are aware of the changes.
They continue: “The cycle lanes will break at junctions and bus stops to ensure traffic flow remains unhindered and should help to calm traffic and reduce vehicle speeds on the road, which we know has been an ongoing concern to local residents. There is already evidence in other parts of the country that speeding has become more of an issue since movement restrictions were first introduced.”
Halfords promise to check over 7 million neglected bikes as part of 'Get Back On A Bike' campaign
The campaign – supported by Chris Boardman and Victoria Pendleton – sees the retail giant offering to fix up neglected bikes hanging around in garages with a 32-point check to ‘help people get set for the post lockdown commute’:
“Most people won’t be going back to their workplaces for a few weeks so they could use this time to re-familiarise themselves with cycling”, says CEO Graham Stapleton.
“Increasingly we are also seeing more members of the public turn to electric bikes to help them get to work and navigate longer journeys. We offer a wide range of electric bikes, which now facilitate journeys of up to 60 miles on one charge.”
Chris Boardman commented: “Yet again bikes have proved to be a robust and reliable form of transport in a crisis. Using them to make short journeys to work and school will not only help us through this difficult time, they can be part of a better, sustainable future for us and our families. If we enable people to keep doing what they have discovered in the past few weeks to look after their mental and physical health, we will not only be helping our NHS through this crisis we will be protecting it long-term.”
The optimism is based on comments from the Prime Minister who talked of the potential for a “golden age of cycling“, backed up by a £2 billion investment in active travel. Will it all materialise? Here’s to hoping…
Official government coronavirus FAQs published
The document that followed Boris Johnson’s speech is now online. With regards to exercise, the one important point that was omitted in Johnson’s speech was that it is now acceptable to meet one other person outdoors from a different household, and use sports facilities such as tennis courts with that person; which means technically you can go on a bike ride with a friend, if you follow social distancing rules. As outlined in our article on how much distance you should leave to the cyclist in front during the pandemic, the distance of 2 metres gets longer when you consider speed and slipstreams on a bike; so really this still wouldn’t be a responsible idea, although according to a reader who questioned his MP, that is the official line from the government.
I spoke to my local MP, @aliciakearns and this is the response I had… 👌🏼 pic.twitter.com/gQseqJKWtP
— Ste Rumbelow (@Ste_Rumbelow) May 11, 2020
Click here for our latest cycling-specific Q+A on what (we believe) is now acceptable according to the new guidelines.
11 May 2020, 08:21
New app shows your Strava followers the reason why your ride was slower than usual
Free Headwind app provides visualisation of wind conditions and ride difficulty rating
The free app aims to help cycle commuters plan their rides
11 May 2020, 08:21
Our latest competition is almost too good to be true... I say almost because blimey it's true, you really could win a Genesis Croix de Fer!
Genesis Croix de Fer 20 ALT competition is closed and we have a Winner!
The Genesis competition is closed and we are now able to announce who will be riding around on a new Croix de Fer!
11 May 2020, 08:21
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.
48 Comments
Latest Comments
@robgodd The poor guy himself suffered a traumatic brain injury and his skull was so badly shattered a significant portion of it had to be removed - do me a favour, have a look around cycling helmet manufacturers and see if any of them claim the foam hats they produce will protect against or even mitigate that level of injury. I'll wait if you like, but I can save us both the time and tell you what you'll find: none of them. Not a single one of them will. Because they don't, and they *can't* based on simple physics. Once the point of failure in a material is reached all(or as near as makes no odds) of the additional force beyond that necessary threshhold transfers through to the object beneath. Since bicycle helmets are rated for forces roughly equivalent to being dropped straight down from a stationary start 1.5m above a hard surface. Now, I'm not an expert in vehicle crash investigation, but I'm *fairly* sure that any impact or series of impacts powerful enough to render a quarder of your skull into gravel, put you in a weeks-long coma, give you massive amnesia, and leave you with ongoing symptoms of traumatic brain injury are a little bit, a teeny-weeny amount, a little smidgeon-widgeon more than what bike helmets are rated for. That's why none of the companies that make them claim they will help in such circumstances: because they know it would be a lie, and that unlike uninformed punters, carbrained journalists, or "medical professionals" who think wearing a helmet would save you from a broken arm(an actual scenario encountered by a mate, who's nurse at the A&E tutted and harrumphed her way through his whole treatment due to his lack of helmet despite his bonce having come through *being hit by a car* - another scenario bike helmets are worthless in - completely unscathed), the lawyers for those companies know their business and understand that if you lie in advertising you will get sued into the ground.
The Battle of Ypres April 1915. The German infantry division advanced using das Brumptstadt Fahrarden. The slow speed kept them behind the cloud of chlorine gas as it drifted towards the Commonwealth trenches. The offensive cleaved a two mile gap in the Western Front. The use of cycles was copied by the Japanese as they invaded Singapore and Burmah. By then war technology had embraced wider low pressure tyres, carbon frames and hydration gels. The German forces decided not to incorporate cycling as part of Operation Session, as bike theft in London and the South East was rife and would have caused huge casualties. Ironically superior advancement of tyre technology led to a British victory at El Alamein. This technology played a key part in the US Marines victory at Iwo Jima.
The appropriate response to Google pissing on your cereal is not a fancy new sugar that removes the taste of urine. Stop using Google products where you can. Firefox browser and DuckDuckGo search engine have had noticeable upticks in market share by explicitly NOT pushing AI.
my thoughts exactly...I wonder how that approach is working, with motor vehicle drivers...🤔
I do not wish to diminish the personal tragedy, but one never hear calls for pedestrians or even hikers to wear clothing with integrated lightening rods.
RE Andy Burnam / Heidi Alexander - this is the best thing in many ways - set an example (even if currently it leads to lots of online name-calling). And imagine some of the political alternatives! The folks in the apparently second-placed party seem incredibly unlikely to be doing so. And even the current "new Greens" seem less interested in ... y'know, environmental things. OTOH I wish Heidi could be bolder. And I fear that like anyone ambitious enough to get to the top (exception B Johnson - well, I guess there was the Corbyn bicycle...) Burnam will be trimming his transport policy sails to fit the wind (should that be "bunker-fuel-burning engines"?)
@mattsccm Bull bars aren't banned, they just have to conform to regulations so they are deformable or have plates that allow crumple give on contact, rather than rigid steel bars that can smash into pedestrians and cyclists with no give at all, catch them and drag them under the wheels. If you think that's a problem, do one. Why should who is responsible for a collision remove the responsibility of people driving a tonne of machinery on the road from having safety features to at least mitigate some of the effects of a collision?
I'd be willing to bet that's lazy use of stock photography rather than deliberate misinformation, but the result is still the same.
@smallbeer You obviously don't realise how many bulls there are wandering around Chelsea, in and out of the china shops, that he needs to protect his Range Rover from.
I agree, it's bloody 'elf and safety overreach, can't help some people, I put some meat, sorry, neat decoration on the front of mine and the polis were round poking their noses in like that (mind you, that was a mistake...) (etc)
48 thoughts on “Government publish official updated guidelines; Box Hill bike shop claims telephoto lens antics forced closure; Brighton gets cycle lane on major A road; Will latest lockdown regs change our riding?; Uttrup Ludwig has a sh*t day + more on the live blog”
The big baby sums it up
The big baby sums it up perfectly.
The survey, from Wednesday.
The survey, from Wednesday.
Unless of course “clarifications” emerge…
Quote:
So, like pretty much every other time he’s spoken to the public. Or to Parliament. Or to the media…
brooksby wrote:
And of course, there was the inevitable lie about doing hundreds of thousands of tests a day when they haven’t even got to 100,000; unless you count the ones they’ve posted that is.
eburtthebike wrote:
Turns out there were a lot more lies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGyPIj0JvnA&fbclid=IwAR3vQt45C5TcxPcVpNeHbQO6IckaJGIE6PBWmPPEZEPEeC4NqKTob-_iKss
Unlimited outdoor exercise
“Unlimited outdoor exercise!”
Quote:
Hardly true, I pay £0 tax on my car… 1.8 turbo diesel.
I used to pay £140 when I had my 1.2L petrol!
Given everything, the government is currently saying about using cycling to get around (thereby avoiding people on public transport), scrapping VAT on bikes could encourage many more people to cycle, getting people out of cars (less pollution, less congestion) and making people healthier (less NHS strain).
“Boris Johnson was accused by
“Boris Johnson was accused by some of lacking clarity in last night’s address….”
I do so love the English understatement.
This sums up the ‘confusion’
This sums up the ‘confusion’ some are experiencing nicely.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/11/lefts-hysterical-confusion-no-10s-plan-utterly-transparent/
Ah, yes! Fine words from a
Ah, yes! Fine words from a saintly pillar of political independence!
Name a mass circulation
Name a mass circulation politically neutral newspaper.
I’ll wait.
That used to be The
That used to be The Independent, sadly no longer
Rich_cb wrote:
Probably closest is The Independent (though leaning leftwards a bit) or The Times (leaning rightwards).
From: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/03/07/how-left-or-right-wing-are-uks-newspapers
That did used to be true of
That did used to be true of the independent but their new business model has seen them chasing millennial clicks and getting far more left wing as a result.
Rich_cb wrote:
Yeah, I’m not a fan of their opinion pieces (nor the Guardian’s either) even when I broadly agree with the sentiments therein. I’d rather reporting stuck to facts and events that happen.
I had a brief read of that Telegraph article (I usually avoid reading it due to the paywall as well as not usually agreeing with the politics) but it didn’t really contain anything of interest. I’d expect political parties to break solidarity when the govt puts out a garbled message. How, precisely, am I supposed to Stay Alert to an invisible virus?
Another point is that unlimited exercise is now allowed though it was previously allowed anyway (exercise being one of the valid reasons to go outside and no limit specified).
I think the exercise thing is
I think the exercise thing is a changing of guidance rather than legislation. The guidance before was for a bicycle ride of around an hour’s duration.
The huge publicity is a bit out of keeping with a relatively minor change but the publicity massively benefits cyclists so I’m not complaining!
You can’t stay alert to the virus itself but you can stay alert to situations were you might be at higher risk of contracting it. I don’t think that’s too difficult to interpret.
That was pretty much the point of the article, people are feigning confusion and that ‘confusion’ appears to be heavily split along partisan lines.
Indicating it’s not real confusion but merely opportunism.
From Labour’s pont of view they are being politically savvy in criticising the communication. It saves them from committing to a strategy and leaves them free to claim they would have done things better regardless of the outcome.
Rich_cb wrote:
It wasn’t. It said nothing at all about duration.
I think back stabbing Gove
I think back stabbing Gove mentioned timings in some throw away remark.
hirsute wrote:
The back-stabbing thing was entirely false, and the whole thing of Gove letting Boris down by standing for the leadership himself was a con. Neither Boris nor Gove wanted to face the shit storm that was Brexit, despite the fact they’d caused it, and needed a way for them to avoid being elected, so Gove initially supported Boris for the leadership, then announced his own candidacy, knowing very well that he didn’t have a chance, and allowing Boris to bow out claiming wounded pride.
If Gove really had done it, would he be in the cabinet today, and best buddies with, guess who, Boris the Liar?
I’ve obviously spent too much
I’ve obviously spent too much time listening to Dead Ringers
I think Gove said that did he
I think Gove said that did he not?
Gove made an off-the-cuff
Gove made an off-the-cuff comment when pressed in an interview – it wasn’t part of the guidance and didn’t have any official standing.
Even so, he didn’t exactly say that anyway. He said it would depend on people’s fitness, and he would imagine for most people a cycle ride would be about an hour. So he was speculating about what the majority of people might be capable of, but not stating that it was the case, or laying down any limits.
“Lawyer and policy expert
“Lawyer and policy expert David Allen Green” refers to it in the tweet embedded in the live blog as a “change in guidance”.
If it bothers you that much go and argue it out with him.
I honestly don’t care.
The official guidance
The official guidance (slightly weirdly) said that it should only be ‘one form’ of exercise a day. Subsequently, in the daily briefings (which could reasonably be considered part of official guidance), mention was made of ‘exercise once a day’.
It’s these constraints that have been removed from the guidance, not any restriction on the amount of time you could exercise for, which, as DAG says in the tweet above, was never limited in the first place.
There wasnt a change in
There wasnt a change in guidance but the media reported it as though there were one,presumably on basis that any utterance from a cabinet member is immediately government policy, but that is why we should care about it because that media interpretation resulted in a stack of anti cycling rubbish directed at cyclists who werent doing anything wrong.
“claim they would have done
“claim they would have done things better regardless of the outcome”
Nobody could have done things worse.
There was negligence in not taking measures soon enough at the start, and this is negligence in opening up before you’ve got test, track and trace in place.
Your post makes it clear you
Your post makes it clear you have literally no clue what you’re talking about.
This will go on for 18 months minimum.
Pretending that you know which approach is right or wrong a few months in just exposes your ignorance/arrogance (delete as appropriate).
That Telegraph piece does
That Telegraph piece does bang on about the criticism being partisan but it looks like the criticism goes wider afield and maybe the more accurate view is that the Tories are instead showing unity over this (which is possibly a good thing).
I disagree about “Stay Alert” not being vague though. What does staying alert to situations actually mean? A message such as “Cover your face” or “Take precautions” or even “Keep apart” would be simpler and much more precise.
Even Tory MPs seem to be getting confused: https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1259766541794582528
(Sorry – features Piers Morgan who is a nasty piece of work)
Ultimately, I think the “Stay alert” message is partly designed to be mocked whilst hiding the lack of following scientific evidence (e.g. the message wasn’t run past the usual medical advisors) and the lack of testing.
From: https://twitter.com/ESpringW11/status/1259548288556109826
Of course people on the right
Of course people on the right understand the current right-wing government’s messages. Because they’re all part of that “silent majority” which loudmouthed anti-elitists (with opinion columns in newspapers owned by billionaires) claim to represent (without a trace of irony). So they don’t have to even stop of think about whether they understand it because, by definition, whatever they imagine to be the situation is what everyone (except a few work-shy lefties who somehow rule the world) also have in their minds. That is until, say, they go to Dover to film some propaganda video and get in a hissy fit when the police have a quiet word with them. The same groupthink can occur on the far left, in Soviet Russia for example, which shows just how far to the right some have swung that they resemble each other so closely.
It’s always going to be
It’s always going to be difficult to convey a raft of instructions into a short and easily memorised slogan.
It has to be broad enough to cover most guidance so will always be open to criticism that it’s too vague.
I think ‘stay alert’ is about as good as you can probably get. Interestingly France have gone for a similar slogan.
Messages don’t need to be run past medical advisors. They produce the advice the communications specialists produce the slogans.
It’s not as if ‘stay alert’ contradicts any of the advice given.
That’s just another media red herring.
Rich_cb wrote:
For those, like me, who have ideological, trust and honesty issues with clicking on a link for the Torygraph, the headline reads “The Left’s hysterical ‘confusion’ over No 10’s plan is utterly transparent”
That’s as far as I read.
Translation:
Translation:
I refuse to challenge my predetermined views by reading anything outside my echo chamber.
Rich_cb wrote:
That may be true but every time I click a link to a vaguely right wing media source it’s either made up of utter drivel, complete bollocks or bare-face lies… or a combination of all three. No-one is really surprised if the Sun and its counterpoint the Mirror are like that, they are aimed at people with little intellect and no interest in facts, but the views expressed in the more ‘serious’ papers is a genuinely serious problem for democracy.
The headline referred to above is a fair example. I know the Torygraph has long been referred to the Conservative party’s in-house newsletter but it stopped being even remotely even-handed in reporting news and current affairs some time ago.
Simon E wrote:
That may be true but every time I click a link to a vaguely right wing media source it’s either made up of utter drivel, complete bollocks or bare-face lies… or a combination of all three. No-one is really surprised if the Sun and its counterpoint the Mirror are like that, they are aimed at people with little intellect and no interest in facts, but the views expressed in the more ‘serious’ papers is a geuinely serious problem for democracy.
The headline referred to above is a fair example. I know the Torygraph has long been referred to the Conservative party’s in-house newsletter but it stopped being even remotely even-handed in reporting news and current affairs some time ago.
— Rich_cbThanks for saving me the trouble of writing that. Was it only last week that there was a report about how the British media is the least trusted in Europe? Strangely not reported by the msm.
Bear in mind that the
Bear in mind that the headline is written by the sub editors and designed to create interest.
The author has nothing to do with it.
I’m not claiming that the Telegraph is unbiased, far from it, but it is an important counterweight to the bias of the Guardian.
If you read them both you can get a reasonable idea if what is actually happening in the world.
If you just stick to one you’re basically blinkering yourself to a huge amount of information that is routinely omitted because it doesn’t fit the narrative that the editors are promoting.
The Guardian is actually far worse for this than the Telegraph.
Both have their fair share of drivel, bollocks and lies. The challenge is recognising it in your own favoured columns or papers. The only way to do that reliably is to read counterpoints in ideologically different papers.
Refusing to read ‘right wing’ sources just leaves you vulnerable to manipulation by the ‘left wing’ papers you choose to read.
Rich_cb wrote:
How wonderful it must be to be totally, utterly, completely objective and be able to point out the biases of others while having none whatsoever of your own. Who was it who said that self-delusion is the most powerful force on earth?
Spotting omissions doesn’t
Spotting omissions doesn’t require you to be free of bias.
It simply requires you to have the ability to read.
If I read the coverage of a subject in the guardian then read the coverage of the same subject in the telegraph it doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes to notice if there are facts being deliberately omitted from one or both papers.
This happens more frequently in the guardian.
If you refuse to read alternative sources of news then you are just allowing yourself to be manipulated.
Rich_cb wrote:
Did Dunning and Kruger acknowledge your contribution to their research? As a subject obviously.
Are you claiming it’s
Are you claiming it’s difficult to spot differences between two articles?
It’s basic comprehension.
I’m hardly claiming mastery of string theory.
It’s still too early to
It’s still too early to accurately critique any country’s approach to the virus, which is going to be around for years. What’s going to happen when hermetically-sealed New Zealand wants to open itself up to the rest of the world? Will Germany’s lead on testing make any difference to its death toll in the end? Should the UK have gone into lockdown earlier? Should we have applied lockdown only to vulnerable groups? There is no consensus on this amongst scientists and no consensus amongst the public. There is no “best way” to deal with an unknown, moving target like Covid-19.
Yes, we all have our own different opinions, but anyone claiming to know what’s been done rightly and wrongly by the government of any country is calling the winner of the London marathon at Cutty Sark.
It seems to me that a section of the British public is simply unwilling or unable to make a judgement about how to live their lives. The media largely seems to want a tailored laundry list for every person in the country – anything else is unclear, too muddled.
I’m no fan of Johnson, but you don’t need to be a professor of English to understand from Sunday’s broadcast that it’s time to return to the workplace if you need to be there to do your job, if you can get there safely and stay safe once there, and don’t have childcare issues.
Exactly.
Exactly.
I don’t think it’s that complicated, people just need to take a small amount of personal responsibility.
Rich_cb wrote:
Is that so?
But is omitting certain items of information the main problem? While I’d not ever be as complacent as to say that the Guardian is ‘accurate’ the perspective of its owners and editors is one I am far more comfortable with than the billionaires that bankroll (and most certainly steer the perspective of) the Telegraph.
I’d suggest that looking at the subject matter, the emphasis and how they are framed is informative. Do I want to experience a xenophobic world view or an inclusive one? Flag-waving anti-EU royalists trying to protect a system of privilege and inherited wealth? Does my main news source stand up for the rights of people on minimum wage or does it argue for tax cuts for the rich and laws to benefit corporations and supress employees? Does it probe into ministers’ international connections or does it gloss over those awkward trade deals and private meetings with dubious characters? I know which one I prefer to use and I’d want it to do that regardless of which party is in power (and to scrutinise the opposition parties equally).
I don’t have the time and energy to read and analyse the coverage from multiple sources; sometimes one is too much.
That just comes across as
That just comes across as hopelessly naïve.
You are relying on one source of news leaving yourself entirely ignorant of any information that your chosen source chooses to omit.
Omitting vital pieces of information is incredibly important. Often information will come to light that completely undermines the editorial position. The responsible thing to do would be to include coverage of that information and allow the readers to make up their own minds. What usually happens is that the inconvenient facts are simply ignored.
As I’ve said previously, in my experience this happens most often and most obviously in the guardian. The telegraph, while clearly still having an editorial line, does appear to allow far more pluralist viewpoints than the guardian.
If you want to be informed you need to read multiple sources.
Try a free trial of the telegraph, read it with an open kind and consider whether it’s healthy to have your own preconceptions challenged? Hint: it very much is.
If you really can’t abide the telegraph you could do the same with the Economist. You’ll often find information in there that concisely dismantles the opinions in the guardian and the telegraph.
Halfords checking 7m bikes
Halfords checking 7m bikes for roadworthiness? oh the irony…
Oooh, look some paint. The
Oooh, look some paint. The A270 has always been a monumental racetrack, that isn’t going to make cycling on it any safer. See those traffic islands? See the NMOTD today?
Right, and the Government’s
Right, and the Government’s new Statutory Guidance specifically says use physical separation because “road markings only are very unlikely to be sufficient to deliver the level of change needed.”
Whilst it’s good to see some
Whilst it’s good to see some places cracking on with introducing their pop up cycle lanes it is disappointing, but not unsurprising, to see some councils – Haringey and Barnet – already finding a range of spurious reasons not to introduce pop up lanes.
People appeared to get excited on Saturday that the guidance would ‘tell’ councils to introduce the temporary lanes as if this guaranteed their introduction. You can ‘tell’ a child to tidy their room but you can’t force them to do it just as the guidance can’t force councils to build the lanes.
Again another lame and half-hearted response from the govt in this crisis that’ll likely be picked up only by those councils that have an interest in cycling already.
You are correct unfortunately
You are correct unfortunately. The usual councils (in London) Camden, Hackney, Lambeth, Enfield will continue to do good stuff for active travel and others like Barnet won’t. Haringey is a peculiar case, it’s centre left, it espouses and preaches active travel and cycling but actually does FA to promote active travel or make it easier. It’s a borough criss crossed by rat runs, busy, hostile roads and angry, aggressive drivers. (And that’s just during the ‘lockdown’)