http://www.bristol24...-cyclists-fury/
The editor responds:
Last week, I published a blog written by Kayla which generated more comments and abuse than virtually any article written on Bristol24-7 in its short life.
I received this letter…
The editor responds:
Last week, I published a blog written by Kayla which generated more comments and abuse than virtually any article written on Bristol24-7 in its short life.
I received this letter…
I am writing to you regarding the article ‘Kayla Maratty: My homicidal tendencies towards cyclists aside, the tuition fees fight goes’ published on the Bristol 24-7 website on 19/01/11.
Why have you chosen to publish an article which jokes about killing people? The timing of this article is particularly insensitive – only this weekend a cyclist was killed in Gloucestershire:
http://www.bbc.co.uk...rshire-12201439
Do you regard cyclists as a fair target for jokes about homicidal intent, as in Kayla’s article, as they are not in a category covered by the PCC’s Editors’ Code on Discrimination?
As someone who cycles (and drives, and walks) in Bristol, comments like: ‘Part of me would take great pleasure in mowing them [cyclists] down when they choose to cycle in the middle of the road or are determined to pedal all the wayup [sic] Black Boy Hill.’ – chill me to the core.
Perhaps you’ve never cycled? Are you aware of how lethally dangerous some people drive? Or the abuse and physical threat some drivers direct at people on bicycles, for no other reason that the fact they happen to be exercising their legal right to use the road? On more than one occasion I’ve been deliberately driven at – merely for having the temerity to be on a bicycle (y’know, like deciding to ‘pedal all the wayup a hill’ [!]).
Whilst I of course do not hold you directly responsible for the actions of some drivers, and I am of course aware that this is not necessarily your personal opinion, the fact is that you have chosen to publish this article and this adds credence to the attitude that it’s just a joke to drive dangerously and threaten people’s lives whilst they’re on bicycles. Clearly your aspirations for ‘Bristol 24-7’ are just to join the ranks of the many professionally bigoted rags, publishing deliberately provocative articles in a desperate attempt to manufacture ‘outrage’. Seriously, give it up and do something useful instead – there’s far too much of that shoot already.
So, what is your justification for publishing this article? If you offer me the defence that the article is ‘humorous’ in intent, perhaps you’d consider publishing a similar article from someone joking about having homicidal intent toward young white females in Bristol too? Or must the victim be on a bicycle for the ‘humour’ to work?
I await your response with interest.
Yours sincerely,
Steven Green
This was by far the most intelligent and considered response I had. Not hard, considering we had comments such as “dumb b*&^h” posted on the article.Why have you chosen to publish an article which jokes about killing people? The timing of this article is particularly insensitive – only this weekend a cyclist was killed in Gloucestershire:
http://www.bbc.co.uk...rshire-12201439
Do you regard cyclists as a fair target for jokes about homicidal intent, as in Kayla’s article, as they are not in a category covered by the PCC’s Editors’ Code on Discrimination?
As someone who cycles (and drives, and walks) in Bristol, comments like: ‘Part of me would take great pleasure in mowing them [cyclists] down when they choose to cycle in the middle of the road or are determined to pedal all the wayup [sic] Black Boy Hill.’ – chill me to the core.
Perhaps you’ve never cycled? Are you aware of how lethally dangerous some people drive? Or the abuse and physical threat some drivers direct at people on bicycles, for no other reason that the fact they happen to be exercising their legal right to use the road? On more than one occasion I’ve been deliberately driven at – merely for having the temerity to be on a bicycle (y’know, like deciding to ‘pedal all the wayup a hill’ [!]).
Whilst I of course do not hold you directly responsible for the actions of some drivers, and I am of course aware that this is not necessarily your personal opinion, the fact is that you have chosen to publish this article and this adds credence to the attitude that it’s just a joke to drive dangerously and threaten people’s lives whilst they’re on bicycles. Clearly your aspirations for ‘Bristol 24-7’ are just to join the ranks of the many professionally bigoted rags, publishing deliberately provocative articles in a desperate attempt to manufacture ‘outrage’. Seriously, give it up and do something useful instead – there’s far too much of that shoot already.
So, what is your justification for publishing this article? If you offer me the defence that the article is ‘humorous’ in intent, perhaps you’d consider publishing a similar article from someone joking about having homicidal intent toward young white females in Bristol too? Or must the victim be on a bicycle for the ‘humour’ to work?
I await your response with interest.
Yours sincerely,
Steven Green
