# Daily Mail anti-cycling headline



## machew (14 Oct 2017)

Victims of killers on two wheels: These six people all died after being hit by cyclists and 100 more are badly hurt every year - so when WILL the law crack down?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...x-people-died-hit-cyclists.html#ixzz4vTJix5gj


----------



## MontyVeda (14 Oct 2017)

nothing new under the sun.


----------



## gaijintendo (14 Oct 2017)

I'm not going to click the link in order to judge the journalism as they will somehow monetise the click. But I suspect it's scarily close to this at dmhq.

Boss: Ok anti-cyclist team. Things are starting to flag. These dead people. We need names.... We need photos. It would really help if at least one of them was female and attractive.


----------



## Drago (14 Oct 2017)

So about 3-4 days of national car related injuries. As balanced as always.


----------



## ianrauk (14 Oct 2017)

Not even worth reading the link. It's just the normal daily hate clickbait


----------



## J1888 (14 Oct 2017)

Cretins. From the editor to the spineless bastards that sell their souls writing for them.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Oct 2017)

The Daily Moan it is like being near someone elses squealing disc brakes.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (14 Oct 2017)

Unfortunately the press like to demand a change to things to demonstrate their power.
They don't give a stuff about the dead and injured people, who are just their means of manipulating others towards their demonstration.
This won't be the end if it.

They've got to stop people thinking about phone tapping and voice mail hacking.


----------



## Roadhump (14 Oct 2017)

To be fair, I have no problem with the law being improved to deal with errant or irresponsible cyclists, if current law isn't effective. I think there is some merit in the argument for third party insurance, although how you enforce it, is another matter. I have insurance via membership of Cycling UK, but I don't fancy wearing a sandwich board with number plates either side (how else would they be displayed?) and the cyclist road tax argument is easily knocked back. 

However, the Daily Heil's grossly unbalanced, sensationalist line gets on my wick. 

A stereotypical anti-cycling bullet often fired our way is that "they all ignore red lights" but as I said to a non-cyclist mate who recently complained to me about this, my belief is that it's the minority getting the majority a bad name, I don't RLJ, but in any event if you have ever jumped a red light whilst driving a car, or exceeded the speed limit, failed to conform to a traffic sign, parked on the pavement, or driven after consuming alcohol even within the legal limit, you are taking a far greater risk with the safety of others than a cyclist doing the same, so wind your neck in and get a bit of proportion please. He took a sip of his pint, looked at me, and said, "fair point".


----------



## swee'pea99 (14 Oct 2017)

"The married mother of two was left maimed when a Lycra-clad man on a bike".... it's like a parody of Daily Mail-speak.


----------



## User269 (14 Oct 2017)

It's hate crime, pure & simple.


----------



## snorri (14 Oct 2017)

I haven't been offended by Daily Mail articles or links for many years, they're on the equivalent of an 'Ignore' button in my head.


----------



## Racing roadkill (14 Oct 2017)

They're all immigrants too, they took our jerbs.


----------



## User269 (14 Oct 2017)

Post facts and comments on the Daily Mail website. Write to your MP urging something be done about the considerably greater number of pedestrians killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles, and the promotion of hatred and agressive driving (Brexit vote saw a rise in racial abuse for example) caused by the anti-cycling hysteria in sections of the press. I just have.
I wonder if we'll see anything from Cycling UK on this?


----------



## User269 (14 Oct 2017)

Roadhump said:


> A stereotypical anti-cycling bullet often fired our way is that "they all ignore red lights" but as I said to a non-cyclist mate who recently complained to me about this, my belief is that it's the minority getting the majority a bad name, I don't RLJ, but in any event if you have ever jumped a red light whilst driving a car, or exceeded the speed limit, failed to conform to a traffic sign, parked on the pavement, or driven after consuming alcohol even within the legal limit, you are taking a far greater risk with the safety of others than a cyclist doing the same, so wind your neck in and get a bit of proportion please. He took a sip of his pint, looked at me, and said, "fair point".



*Key facts:*
·In London (1998-2007), just 4% of reported pedestrian injuries due to red-light-jumping involved cyclists - the other 96% were hit by red-light-jumping motor vehicles. 

Cyclists aren't the problem. I'm sick of idiot non cyclists bleating on about RLJs, pedestrians killed or seriously injured. It's perfectly clear where the problem lies.


----------



## Roadhump (14 Oct 2017)

User269 said:


> *Key facts:*
> ·In London (1998-2007), just 4% of reported pedestrian injuries due to red-light-jumping involved cyclists - the other 96% were hit by red-light-jumping motor vehicles.
> 
> Cyclists aren't the problem. I'm sick of idiot non cyclists bleating on about RLJs, pedestrians killed or seriously injured. It's perfectly clear where the problem lies.



Which is why I told my mate to get a bit of proportion. However, the few cyclists who choose to be irresponsible let us all down, so when they are seen ignoring a red light, they hand the anti-cycling crew ammunition, a bit like the minority of benefit cheats, or bent police officers whose crimes are seized upon by those with a vested interest in using them as evidence that none can be trusted.

As a cyclist, I have experienced the bullying and abuse of impatient drivers (as well as the courtesy of others to be fair), and that adds to my resentment of unbalanced reporting in rags like the DM, as well the shallow thinking behind many of the comments that follow the article. But to be honest, I also see cyclists letting the side down which annoys me. 

I actually think the biggest problem with cyclists is the hoody type youths, of whom there are plenty round my neck of the woods, who ride along the pavement, without lights and ignore traffic signs etc, often riding in a way to deliberately intimidate or harass other road users and pedestrians. They probably won't ride bikes much past their teenage years, but some of their behaviour is atrocious. Many people who read the likes of the DM poison will consequently see that biased anti-cycling propaganda reinforced, and us responsible types end up with an undeserved reputation, especially when there is very little high profile reply to counter it.


----------



## Pale Rider (14 Oct 2017)

Bleating about the Daily Mail is spectacularly missing the point - unless you think the six named individuals were not killed by cyclists.

The article goes on to say 25 pedestrians have been killed by cyclists in the last seven years.

Is that a price worth paying for the freedom to cycle?

Or should more be done than is presentiy being done to reduce the numbers of deaths?

Doing more will inevitably reduce the freedom to cycle in one way or another, so that would have a general impact on all of us, and a direct impact on some of us.


----------



## Markymark (14 Oct 2017)

Cycling is massively safer for everyone than driving. The problem here is that stuff like this restrict cycling thus further encourage driving. This will kill and injure more in the long run.


----------



## mjr (14 Oct 2017)

machew said:


> Victims of killers on two wheels: These six people all died after being hit by cyclists and 100 more are badly hurt every year - so when WILL the law crack down?


How about right after it cracks down on the 9 killed and 100 badly hurt by motorists every WEEK? Let's get a sense of proportion and target the bigger danger instead of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.


----------



## palinurus (14 Oct 2017)

Roadhump said:


> I actually think the biggest problem with cyclists is the hoody type youths, of whom there are plenty round my neck of the woods, who ride along the pavement, without lights and ignore traffic signs etc, often riding in a way to deliberately intimidate or harass other road users and pedestrians.



Particularly visible perhaps, but barely a problem. The biggest problem with cyclists is there aren't enough of them.


----------



## numbnuts (14 Oct 2017)

Since the Charlie Alliston case I seem to be getting more and more verbal abuse as late, today I was shouted at twice telling to to get off the f...ing road and both times I was not holding anybody up and I think the media has a lot to answer for.


----------



## jefmcg (14 Oct 2017)

User269 said:


> Post facts and comments on the Daily Mail website.


Do not feed the beast.


----------



## mjr (14 Oct 2017)

numbnuts said:


> Since the Charlie Alliston case I seem to be getting more and more verbal abuse as late, today I was shouted at twice telling to to get off the f...ing road and both times I was not holding anybody up and I think the media has a lot to answer for.


When cycling along a cycleway recently, I was especially surprised to hear a loud long honking and being shouted at to get ON the road. 

I'm not sure it's entirely media to blame for stupid motorists.


----------



## jefmcg (14 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> How about right after it cracks down on the 9 killed and 100 badly hurt by motorists every WEEK?


Or they could focus on to 40 *additional* pedestrians killed by cars in 2016 compared to 2015


----------



## youngoldbloke (14 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> When cycling along a cycleway recently, I was especially surprised to hear a loud long honking and being shouted at to get ON the road.
> 
> I'm not sure it's entirely media to blame for stupid motorists.


- there's a lot of stupidity about certainly, but why are the Mail, Express, Telegraph etc so intent on stirring the shoot? Is there no comeback for publishing such misleading stuff? Press Complaints Commission maybe?


----------



## Welsh wheels (14 Oct 2017)

Daily Mail produce anti-cycling headline? Time to break out grandpa's old shotgun.  In fairness, they need something to write about in the winter when they can't invade women's privacy on beaches and take photos on them in their swimwear.


----------



## snorri (14 Oct 2017)

youngoldbloke said:


> y, but why are the Mail, Express, Telegraph etc so intent on stirring the sh1t? Is there no comeback for publishing such misleading stuff?


The comeback for the press of printing controversial rubbish is increased hits on their website which is measured and used to boost their appeal to advertisers which in turn boosts their income.
Cyclists are a minority group in UK society so an easy target whose ability to fight back is limited.


----------



## Milzy (14 Oct 2017)

There’s roadies who know more about the Highway Code than most. Then there’s complete planks on BSO’s riding on pavements giving all the club ‘real’ cyclysts a bad name


----------



## snorri (14 Oct 2017)

Milzy said:


> l the club ‘real’ cyclysts a bad name


----------



## oldstrath (15 Oct 2017)

Pale Rider said:


> Bleating about the Daily Mail is spectacularly missing the point - unless you think the six named individuals were not killed by cyclists.
> 
> The article goes on to say 25 pedestrians have been killed by cyclists in the last seven years.
> 
> ...


Are the 400 pedestrians killed by car drivers ' a price worth paying' for the ability to travel by car?

That's why we 'bleat about the Daily Mail' - not because we imagine they are lying about the 6 people killed by cyclists, but because they ignore the much greater problem caused by motor vehicles.


----------



## growingvegetables (15 Oct 2017)

Almost tempted to wander up to the newsagents, and see how whether the Sunday Heil and its ilk report this - "Drivers who kill will now face life sentence". With the same lurid headlines, pictures, emotional blackmail, detail, and statistics?

I shall resist - not sure I can stomach the "punishing the hard-pressed-motorist" shite.


----------



## numbnuts (15 Oct 2017)

growingvegetables said:


> Almost tempted to wander up to the newsagents, and see how whether the Sunday Heil and its ilk report this - "Drivers who kill will now face life sentence". With the same lurid headlines, pictures, emotional blackmail, detail, and statistics?
> 
> I shall resist - not sure I can stomach the "punishing the hard-pressed-motorist" shite.


Yes they did - I think we will need more prisons 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4981248/Killer-drivers-face-life-sentences.html


----------



## growingvegetables (15 Oct 2017)

numbnuts said:


> Yes they did - I think we will need more prisons
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4981248/Killer-drivers-face-life-sentences.html


Ferkin' 'ell. And two of the photos? Charlie Alliston and Kim Briggs.


----------



## gaijintendo (9 Nov 2017)

I guess the bias extends to autonomous vehicles.

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...ter-las-vegas-launch-truck-autonomous-vehicle

A truck reversed into the autonomous bus. And there are phrases like "Before it crashed". Crash isn't sufficient here. I am sure more than half of the people who would have reversed, probably wouldn't have. If they had, what would the chances of them safely checking behind themselves in the split second.

Other headlines are more direct. Endaget reports "Las Vegas' self-driving bus crashes in first hour of service"... Chopping a further hour off, for what it is worth.

People don't seem to be able to express things well. Myself included. I just don't happen to be a journalist.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (9 Nov 2017)

The bus would have been able to safely reverse as it has 360 sensors to know what was behind it.


----------



## gaijintendo (9 Nov 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> The bus would have been able to safely reverse as it has 360 sensors to know what was behind it.



My point was more, it's not necessarily what a driver would do. If a driver didn't reverse, just as in this case, it isn't the struck drivers fault.


----------

