Complaints about a BBC report which blamed London’s position as the world’s most congested city on an increase in cycle lanes have led the broadcaster to amend the article to “better reflect the range of factors impacting congestion in London”.
In early December traffic firm Inrix named the UK capital as the city in which motorists lost the most time stuck in traffic jams last year in its Global Traffic Scorecard.
> “Incredibly simplistic” to blame cycle lanes for London being named world’s most congested city
While Inrix operations director Peter Lees attributed the rise in congestion to the city’s rapid economic recovery from the pandemic, many mainstream media outlets, including the BBC, preferred to focus on Lees’ claim that the reallocation of road space for pedestrians and cyclists in response to the Covid crisis had a “negative impact” on traffic in the capital.
The BBC covered the report with the headline London congestion: Cycle lanes blamed as city named most congested. A number of other outlets opted for variations on the ‘cycle lanes to blame’ theme, a media response described by charity Cycling UK as “incredibly simplistic”.
Lees responded to the press reaction, emphasising that while more space for cyclists was one of a number of “smaller contributory factors”, the “speedy economic rebound was presented as the single biggest cause of congestion in London”.
He also claimed that the inaccurate representation of the report in the media reflected the views of one journalist he had spoken to, who admitted that focusing on an anti-cycle lane angle “would get more readers”.
The reply from BBC Complaints about the misleading assertion that cycle lanes were to blame for congestion in London.
The have also renamed the article to “London congestion: Capital becomes world’s most congested city”. https://t.co/RhghjrUq4Z pic.twitter.com/G5texauXEU
— Elisabeth Anderson ??? (@velobetty) January 4, 2022
The BBC has since amended its article, changing the headline to London congestion: Capital becomes world’s most congested city. In its reply to a reader’s complaint, the broadcaster wrote, “We understand that you felt the article focused too heavily on cycle lanes and the impact they may have on congestion in London, and note your concerns about a lack of impartiality in the piece.
“We take seriously our responsibility to report accurately and impartially, and have considered these points in detail,” the statement continued. “We believe that the article clearly attributes the source of the report… and provide opposing views from other organisations who don’t agree with some of the claims, such as Cycling UK, to provide balance.
“However, on reflection, we have amended the headline and copy to better reflect the range of factors impacting congestion in London, and for transparency, have added a clarification to that effect at the end of the article.”
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
52 thoughts on “BBC U-turns on article blaming London’s ‘most congested city’ title on cycle lanes”
I’m still waiting for the BBC
I’m still waiting for the BBC to address my complaint about their response to my original complaint about that article.
They should not be allowed to publish such utter clickbait and then when they get called out on it, they get around to changing it weeks later. What’s worse is that they don’t acknowledge how manipulative and divisive the original article was and why exactly they had to change it.
(Welcome to Ryan, by the way)
hawkinspeter wrote:
I’m waiting too, and the revision of the article makes no reference to the original, lying, headline or why it was changed. Nobody who read the first headline will be going back to check if it’s changed, so this response from the BBC is, to put it mildly, inadequate. A proper apology and a new article making it clear that the original headline was wrong is necessary. Astute readers will notice the weasel words used, none of which actually admit bias or error.
The BBC is undeniably biased against cycling, and it’s time they were held to account and changed their ways. Another example was the recent R4 prog “You and Yours” which was another advert for electric cars. They did ask for comments before the prog, so I both rang and emailed, pointing out that bicycles and electric bicycles were better on every criterion except long distance travel, and that they were again excluding public transport, cycling and walking, and I wasn’t the only one. They allowed one person to come on briefly to explain that there were alternatives to the electric car.
And why was London’s economic
And why was London’s economic rebound so much faster? Certainly isn’t down to Sadiq Khan, that’s for sure.
Clue: starts with a “B” and ends in “xit” – the City is already buzzing due to a relaxation in red tape, all the doomsters will be proven wrong. Of course the BBC will be the last to admit it.
Persistent repetition of a
Persistent repetition of a lie doesn’t make it true.
jaymack wrote:
Absolutely.
However, the clown entertains himself and basks in the attention when we pile in with responses. In doing so help reinforce his own prejudices rather than achieve anything remotely positive.
You’re right. But a troll
You’re right. But a troll seeks the kind of attention online that they are unable to get anywhere else, so the occasional reply is an act of kindness and compassion. Prejudice is too big a word here, I think.
Yes, Garage at Large, yes.
Yes, Garage at Large, yes. But now close your eyes and sleep. You’ll need lots and lots of energy tomorrow to play with all your friends at nursery.
Seeing your comments on this
Seeing your comments on this and other stories it’s clear your a troll.
Can you provide a summary of
Can you provide a summary of the red tape that has been relaxed and how it’s affected the economy?
Having to repeat the facts to
Having to repeat the facts to ignorant people like you is tiring but it needs to be done. As of January 2022 UK importers and exporters to the EU have more paperwork to complete including import custom duties. There is now also the necessity for suppliers declaration form and commodity codes which are used to classify goods for customs declarations. There will now be full customs controls at all ports and border locations. Of course non of this was required before brexthick.
Lukas wrote:
But look at all the shiney new trade deals that we now
have toare able to strike with countriesthat we already had trade deals with as part of our EU membershipLukas wrote:
— LukasWorking in the agri/food sector, I can see some of the complication and additional burden placed on many businesses. The costs are soaring, the trade deals are not working favourably for UK farmers and growers and the lack of clear guidance and information from Defra and other govt departments is breathtaking.
B-shit is affecting so many industries in a hugely negative way. This piece from December about some of the small-scale businesses that are part of the music industry and how cross-channel sales have been impacted so far doesn’t make for cheerful reading.
https://thequietus.com/articles/30953-eu-customs-diy-music-uk-brexit
Despite this exports to the
Despite this exports to the EU are holding up nicely.
Imports are down but mostly being replaced by non-EU imports which is likely just a reverse-Rotterdam effect.
Interesting graph but it only
Interesting graph but it only goes up to Nov 20 – before the transition period ended?
Can you post the source with data for this year?
The OBR paints a very different picture after the end of the transition period:
https://obr.uk/box/the-initial-impact-of-brexit-on-uk-trade-with-the-eu/
stomec wrote:
Here you go. Looks like you need to register to change the presentation to the way Rich_cb has it, which I can’t be bothered to do, but I think this is the same data.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/284750/united-kingdom-uk-total-eu-trade-in-goods-by-trade-value/
Think these are the latest
Think these are the latest stats.
Obviously month by month is more variable than annual figures and lockdown/end of transition skews the start of the year somewhat but we now seem to be back to the same level as we’ve been at for the past decade.
The OBR graph is normalised to Q4 2020 which will exaggerate the fall (due to stockpiling) and should therefore not be viewed in isolation.
Rich_cb wrote:
The end of transition didn’t happen at the start of last year as certain provisions have been delayed, especially the introduction of full customs checks for UK imports, which are effective from this month. The transition is an ongoing process, the full effects of which have yet to be anything like fully realised.
Just Google ‘Brexit
Just Google ‘Brexit Transition Period’.
Let me know how you get on.
Rich_cb wrote:
When crucial elements of the transition, e.g. the imposition of customs checks, were delayed beyond the end of the official transition period, it is clear the transition is still ongoing. Just Google “intellectually dishonest” and “in name only” and let me know how you get on.
Well at least you acknowledge
Well at least you acknowledge that there was an “official transition period”.
I’m assuming you don’t dispute that said period ended?
I’m also assuming you don’t dispute that the end of said period coincided with significant trade disruption?
That was all I was pointing out.
I believe most export checks are now in place so the export data I referred to is a good approximation of where we should be once all are in place.
Rich_cb wrote:
No need to do that.
I have colleagues who have had 2 years’ bombardment of queries, complaints, frustration, expense, wasted time over and over again, endless rounds of conference calls with clueless civil servants and far more besides thanks to your much-loved Brexit (and as already mentioned, the party has only just begun). And we are only one small business in one small corner of the UK food industry.
Some fool posting a nice chart they found isn’t going to fix anything.
Maybe not but it does
Maybe not but it does demonstrate that the vast majority of exports have continued unabated.
Rich_cb wrote:
OK if you say so, you’re the expert.
Everything will be fine and dandy if we keep saying it often enough.
I don’t have to say anything.
I don’t have to say anything.
The numbers speak for themselves.
You might not like the facts but that doesn’t stop them being true.
Rich_cb wrote:
Said no one with any working knowledge of complex statistics ever…..
In isolation this may be a reasonable statement.
In the context of your data picking and wild assertions, you’ve managed to make it into word salad.
Rich_cb wrote:
A pretty chart may be ‘factual’ but not accurate.
What you claim are ‘facts’ do not reflect what is happening in the real world.
They do represent what’s
They do represent what’s happening in the real world.
Your personal experience of a very small part of the economy may be different but that doesn’t change the accuracy of the statistics.
Lukas wrote:
Lukas is talking of the present and future, you’re talking of the past. Let’s wait and see what the balance looks like in six months.
“We expect the full impact of Brexit on trade to be manifest only after all the terms of the TCA have been fully implemented” “
“The terms of the TCA are yet to be implemented in full, meaning trade barriers will rise further as more of the deal comes into force.”
– Office of Budget Responsibility
It can’t be denied that some
It can’t be denied that some trade barriers are already in place and, so far, export disruption has not been as great as feared.
It seems entirely reasonable to point that out when people predict future trade disruption.
But yes, let’s wait and see.
Volume disruption is only one
Volume disruption is only one measure though? How about Cost disruption? Even assuming the same volume is flowing, if its at a greater % cost then thats a disruption.
There will definitely be
There will definitely be additional costs but I don’t think we can easily measure them.
Given COVID related inflation throughout supply chains it will be really tricky to get an accurate figure.
Yep, although weirdly
Yep, although weirdly whenever prices have gone up across the whole European region, the UK seems to be hit worst. Probably just local taxes and factors I suspect though and nothing else.
Has that graph got the labels
Has that graph got the labels a bit mangled? The title indicates October 2021, but the Y axis only goes to November 2020 and seems offset as January 1997 is a bit below the top.
Definitely something skwiff
Definitely something squiff with the axis – the first big spike should be Apr/May ’06
The labelling is a bit odd,
The labelling is a bit odd, the raw numbers are available on statista.
For reference stats from 14
For reference stats from 14/15.
Do you masturbate while
Do you masturbate while making this ludicrous and obscene posts? We can only assume these are the rantings of someone derangedly unhinged.
Good job I wasn’t drinking my
Good job I wasn’t drinking my coffee when I saw that
Says the guy who has just
Says the guy who has just posted an unhinged comment.
Pot. Kettle. Black?
Flintshire Boy wrote:
No.
Insulting? yes
Scurrilous? yes
Obscene? yes
Unhinged? No
(Bonus line item – Sympathy? no, but you can find it in the dictionary, somewhere between shit and syphilis)
Oh don’t take things so
Oh don’t take things so seriously, I was only poking fun. I think the object of my humour can wear it.
So you object to the response
So you object to the response but are ok with the baiting, trolling and lies that seek to trigger a response?
How many different people control your account ?
Is that the City of London
Is that the City of London that’s seeing so much of its banking business being transferred to Paris and Frankfurt because of Brexit? But no, you’d rather repeat a lie and then blame the recently re-elected mayor.
OldRidgeback wrote:
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of arseholes. Maybe this Brexshit thing does have upsides…….
You may not like the bankers,
You may not like the bankers, but it’s a fact that the corporate taxes the banking firms pay are one of the biggest contributors to the UK’s GDP. Fewer banking firms will mean less money for the NHS.
OldRidgeback wrote:
That depends on the damage they do that the state/tax payer underwrites as they gouge their corporate profit, on which their corporate tax is calculated.
When that’s taken into account it may be that their overall payback ain’t that great.
Bit like tax receipts from drivers not coming close to covering their costs.
More money for NHS. Where have I heard that before….
By the way, some of my best friend are bankers. And I’m quite happy to tell them so….
Captain Badger wrote:
Tell ’em about the smokers, Captain!
Garage at Large wrote:
I work in the City, and I don’t think Brexit is the catastrophe that many on here think it is. But, there has been very little regulatory change so far. Do you actually know what you are talking about here, or are you just parrotting the latest Daily Mail clickbait?
The City is currently the opposite of buzzing, by the way. It looks like a scene from 28 Days Later.
Garage at Large wrote:
The rebound was large because the collapse in the UK economy was larger. But you already know this.
Which itself was a function
Which itself was a function of how we (in the UK) measure GDP.
The idiocy of that ‘because
The idiocy of that ‘because of cycle lanes’ “interpretation” (which can’t really be called that because it’s wholly unsubstantiated) was given away in the text of the article, where it said how London jumped up by 4 places if memory serves me right but also how absolute traffic livels in London had barely changed.
It would be interesting to see what the cities which London leapfrogged did in terms of encouraging active transport as I suspect we would find out that the only real reason London climbed this comparative table is that not as much was done in favour of active travel and/or Londoners did not embrace better means of transportation as much as the people of those cities. Which ironically, but very familiarly, would mean the very people moaning about being stuck in their cars have only got themselves to blame…
Paris did convert quite alot
Paris did convert quite alot of the city centre into Active Travel sections over the pandemic. I believe it was second on the congestion report even though most pictures on the day made it look like China 20 years ago or Amsterdam with the amount of bikes being used.