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 2 minutes 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 4 minutes 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 25 minutes 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/
chrisonabike 47 minutes ago
Hope Barcelona keep the transport improvements (they've been making for a while) coming! Better streets, more infra to help active travel where necessary. And while it's a major investment (though can be lower operating cost than busses) maybe more trams where they can. That may be more effective in making places active travel friendly and replacing taxis than mass public bike hire. They've a good start with 6 lines already.
chrisonabike 54 minutes ago
I think this is a positive story. They're not getting rid of public hire bikes - they're expanding their in-house one. They're merely kicking out cowboys who've shown they've a lack of interest in the game they claim to be playing. It seems logical that companies whose business model is to extract (venture capital) money by invading public space are even less likely to make the efforts to keep things in order than a local "in house" scheme. (After all the "bikes and riding" part of these schemes always *costs* money, they don't generate it.) So not surprising their experience shows those firms are not particularly motivated to follow the rules - especially when scrapping for "market share". It's nice the European Cyclists’ Federation is thinking about tourists also (i hesitate to say "follow the money...") - as they note, where it's safe to cycle locals will largely get their own bikes. Tourists aren't going to stop coming because lack of public bike share - I think this is mostly a "nice to have" ("hey - why don't we go on one of those bikes there? ").
chrisonabike 1 hour ago
Harm minimization - at least they're not driving...
Gm_Crop 10 hours ago
I'll counter that by saying the Bryton 750se I have drives me nuts at times. Inconsistantly picks up on routes created on Komoot and the app re-syncs every few seconds when trying to set up the device and sends me back to the home screen. The most infuriating one is that I turned live track on. Once. It now won't turn off and repeatedly flags up the live track is starting, and then disconnecting every few seconds whilst riding. I haven't timed it but it wouldn't suprise me if 10-20% of the time the the screen is covered with an error message. That's been about 6 weeks now. Other than that it's great :/
IanGlasgow 10 hours ago
RE: Police launch road safety operation... by clamping down on cyclists using footbridge Meanwhile in Glasgow, Police Scotland are riding their motorbikes over the pedestrian and cyclists only bridge. https://x.com/FietserGlasgow/status/2065106152917012523?s=20
Rendel Harris 11 hours ago
@Paul J Van Schip certainly seems a bit of a dick, but he's a European and multiple World Champion on the track, pretty sure you don't get there without having some talent in your legs.
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?