[Closed] Voice of Reason – Daily Express Royal Correspondent on Cycling

Life is too short to get angry at this sort of stuff... hasn't she just cut and pasted this from last months Daily Mail rant?

Standard "them and us" non-article.

Any chance of a summary without giving that 'orrible lot anymore traffic?
but then again

Life is too short to get angry at this sort of stuff...

Clickbait

Don’t get me wrong, I actually love cycling. I just choose to do it in the safety and comfort of a spinning class at the gym.

OK...

The problem is this is not a harmless article. People read this and it reinforces their belief that cyclists should be treated as second class road users. She gives herself away when she talks about cyclists riding in the middle of the road as if that were somehow inherently wrong and we should all be riding in the gutter regardless of road conditions.

It's a very childish article. Geetee has it right - it's not harmless. The great thing about social media however, as you can see from the comments, is we can subvert the prejudice with reasoned argument...

Also in these comments sections of articles like this, we need to start pointing out that changing 'cyclist' to Jew, Black, Woman, Gay etc would lead to an article which would be an incitement to hatred...

True. 'Jews cycling in the middle of the road'

Great comments after the article though, +1 to them all!

Black Jew Cyclists in the middle of the road riding in a Gay way.

brooess - you the person she's having a dingdong with on Twitter?

Sounds like such a lovely person! Shes even commented "is that how you talk to women" despite it having no relevance...
https://twitter.com/CamillaTominey/status/268308157770645506

PERHAPS it is because my late mother had an affair with a cyclist that I have never had much time for them. I would walk home from school to frequently find his bike propped up against the front gate.

Hora? You didn't?! 😯

brooess - you the person she's having a dingdong with on Twitter?

No. I avoid people like her like the plague. They can only make your life worse.
The article is either a) clickbait or b) she has some serious personal issues which probably require therapy!

she has some serious personal issues which probably require therapy!

-- high speed lead tablet therapy

 

The trouble with cyclists is that they take themselves so very seriously, don’t they?

Obviously she's met a few roadies then 😉

I think the linked article is simply a case of a journalist knowing their audience and spouting accordingly; "Preaching to the choir" if you like...

Foaming at the mouth, right of centre types buy the Mail/Express precisely because they reinforce their world view which of course includes a Clarkson derived claim to hate people on bicycles on the road, hardly groundbreaking.

Of course it cuts both ways; Guardian and Independent readers have their own more left of centre view point, often more pro-cycling along with being Pro Gay rights/environmental protection/Anti-war etc, etc...

I think it's because of this that the perceived "Battle lines" for the current set of cycling safety debates seem to get drawn along roughly Left/Right political lines, but that's not really the case. Cycling safety is not a "Left" or "Right" political issue, it's a Cycling/road safety issue; the only groups who really speak with any authority on the topic are those who's primary functions are cycling and/or road safety...

Papers using it as a basis to vilify any group based on their own political bias is not the way to progress a discussion; labeling of all cyclist or all drivers helps nobody IMO, in seeking to apportion blame for current problems rather than understanding the problems and looking for solutions they merely serve to prevent progress...

Cookeaa has it - it's clickbait supporting the prejudices of their readership. However, in doing that it's damn dangerous writing.

I've emailed BC and asked them why they don't get officially involved in such stories - especially this one as she brings Brad into it, suggesting that the driver hasn't yet been found at blame when in fact, they've been summonsed by the police.

I've suggested they make a formal complaint or at least post an official response in the comments pointing out the inaccuracies and prejudice - ideally on each and every story like this. Social media gives us a voice with such stuff...

Nice one brooess - please let us know how you get on with BC.

Social media gives us a voice with such stuff...

Does it though? Maybe I'm a touch out of sync but the twitterati claiming to give half a shit for one news cycle is not really getting your POV across or achieving any sort of sustained change IMO...

The actual decision makers with any real sway on the issues hold public office and (I would hope) are too busy with real work to pay much attention to social media...

I'd be interested to know where enforcement of road safety and improvement of cycling safety through prevention falls on the agendas of our soon to be Local police commisioners?

Are these people going to escalate enforcement of key road safety legislation [U]FOR ALL[/U] road users?

-Illumination of bikes after dark.
-stopping and fining drivers who use phones behind the wheel
-closer, more regular monitoring of speeding at know accident blackspots.

These are all "crimes" which can be detected, logged and thus added to their performance Stats of course, but also actions which serve to reduce the likelyhood of injuries and fatalitys on the road, prevention and detection in one - Gold star!

Road layout and signage next, a clear set of guidlines focussed on creating a safe environment [U]FOR ALL[/U] road users.

Cookeaa - you're right. Social media will give us a voice, and help us correct such dangerous writing at source, but it's only one component in a whole machine of dealing with the real problem which is dangerous driving.

I find that shouting and waving at bad drivers makes no difference. Mounting a social media response to writing like hers does at least raise awareness amongst a broader audience.

Enforcement of the law is the only real solution for now.

I do wonder what would happen if all commuters and road riders had helmet cameras and at the end of each ride, downloaded all incidences of bad driving and emailed them to the Police asking for prosecution or at least a talking to.
They'd be overwhelmed... maybe that would help drive it up their agenda?

Social media gives us a voice with such stuff...

Does it though? Maybe I'm a touch out of sync but the twitterati claiming to give half a shit for one news cycle is not really getting your POV across or achieving any sort of sustained change IMO...

A day or two ago, there was a charming site appeared blaming cyclists who get killed or injured and branding them as silly ****s.

Through twitter, the ad agency involved got a good kicking, and [url= http://road.cc/content/news/70244-stupid-****s-website-issues-apology-after-backlash-we-look-company-behind-it ]the site disappeared pretty quickly[/url].

If you don't think that she has done her job properly as a journalist, email her editor: http://www.express.co.uk/contact

the real problem which is dangerous driving.

No!!! that precisely what Express/Mail writers and editors want cyclists to say as it serves to polarise the debate...

Dangerous driving is one element amongst many which combine to make cycling less safe (note "Less safe" not "Unsafe")...

I did keep stressing the [U]FOR ALL[/U] element in my comments.

The key thing is to attack the issue on several fronts:

-Enforcement of the rules (y the Rozzers).
-Education (TV ad campaigns, road safety talks etc focussed on both drivers and cyclists - Nobody is imune).
-Town/Road planning.
-finding a way to stop the Meeja engaing in cheap points scoring with "Our" safety (Probably harder than all the above put together).

It's worth restating that Cycling is not a Dangerous activity.

one thing I can see however is a confluence of circumstance creating a bit of a peak in the injury and fatality stats for cycling based on more people taking it up due to :

1- The Olympic/TDF effect.
2- Increases in fuel prices/Reduced/frozen incomes pushing commuters to look for chaeper alternatives to their cars..

More people on bikes = more accidents right? so the issue will come up the agenda sooner or later...

Sadly I suspect her editor is fully aware of this story and what it's trying to achieve... clicks and frothing by a bunch of people who feel inadequate...

Which is why I like social media, we can bypass such gatekeepers and make our voice heard

What a terribly predictable article.

Just missing "cyclists don't pay for the road" for a 100% bullshit score.

Foaming at the mouth, right of centre types buy the Mail/Express precisely because they reinforce their world view which of course includes a Clarkson derived claim to hate people on bicycles on the road, hardly groundbreaking.

You're letting your own bias show by making such generalisations.
Not everyone who buys a paper supports every word in it.
It's fair enough to attack the problem issues in a bit of writing. But if you expand that to attack a general readership, then you're making unnecessary enemies and acting more like the writer you oppose than you may have realised.

[i]"Drivers have to wear seatbelts, so why don’t cyclists"[/i] ❓

articles like this are the death knell of the newspaper industry.
ignore them. and those who follow such types of journalism deserve to drown with their sinking ship.

Not everyone who buys a paper supports every word in it.

then why buy it? fair enough for the broad sheets, but not the red tops.

Inflammatory articles like this serve a very important purpose to news sites - they drive traffic and in turn revenue.

I used to do ad sales for a website that was owned by another national title (and funnily enough a very left leaning and supposedly moral one - the newspaper, not our site!). We would always try and get advertisers to book ads on a CPM basis, where they pay £XXX for so many thousands of page impressions. Our editorial team and directors would regularly allow forum posts and articles to run well beyond what would be deemed "acceptable" language, behaviour and content, solely to generate more clicks and in turn more money.

That's what articles like this are - revenue generators, nothing more.

It more or less follows this article word for word:
[url= http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/the-terrible-journalists-guide-to-writing-an-article-about-bicycles/ ]The terrible journalist’s guide to writing an article about bicycles[/url]

It's the usual article designed to provoke a response and the fact it's been linked to on here, on Twitter, on FB etc shows that it's worked. You may not agree with it but you've clicked through and generated ad revenue, people have signed up to their site to comment on it.

Nice one brooess - please let us know how you get on with BC.

BC campaigns on a slightly broader level than this. Getting involved in every single ill-informed debate on an internet news room is counter productive and believe me, there aren't enough hours in the day!

[i]Sadly I suspect her editor is fully aware of this story and what it's trying to achieve..[/i]

You think the newspaper editor doesn't give a monkey's what sort of garbage is in the public domain, representing his publication?
Even my boss cares that his staff produce accurate and credible work - why wouldn't a newspaper editor feel the same?

[i]It more or less follows this article word for word:
The terrible journalist’s guide to writing an article about bicycles[/i]

Now [b]that[/b] is a well written piece!

Anti cycling sentiment aside, she did open the article by stating her own mum is slag....

why wouldn't a newspaper editor feel the same?

DezB - I suspect your boss is trying to do a good job. Anyone who applies for a job as Editor of a British tabloid knows full well what the game's about - selling papers - which doesn't require quality output! I doubt he/she is cut of the same moral cloth as your boss!

You think the newspaper editor doesn't give a monkey's what sort of garbage is in the public domain, representing his publication?

This is the Daily Express we're talking about. Like the Mail, but without the quality journalism.

Good point, I guess. I don't read newspapers so can't say I fully understand what they are about.
I have emailed the editor and included a link to The terrible Journalist's Guide...

sent a complaint through to the PCC i expect nothing to happen but it is discrimination and as pointed out change cyclist to Jew or black and it would be incitement.

her mum didnt have an affair with a "cyclist" she had an affair with a man who happened to ride a bike, and in lycra? that long ago? i dont think so. its not our fault her mum was a slag

The AsEasyAsRidingABike article is very good.

We definitely need an anti-cyclist bullshit bingo rating system for these articles, maybe we should create an award for the most idiotic one containing the highest number of cliches. Obviously this wouldn't win, missing out "road tax" is a schoolboy error.

You're letting your own bias show by making such generalisations.
Not everyone who buys a paper supports every word in it.
It's fair enough to attack the problem issues in a bit of writing. But if you expand that to attack a general readership, then you're making unnecessary enemies and acting more like the writer you oppose than you may have realised.

You are right of course, I like all other people have my own biases and outlook on life which inevitably colours my views and opinions (and descriptions of express readers), however the point I am trying (and probably failing) to make is that quick and easy point scoring articles (written by writers from whatever quarter) are just a diversion from an issue that essentially has no real Left/right political dimension, which is what most papers and such articles thrive on...

Can you find me a serious politician that would actually support worse cycling safety on UK roads? No?
There might be some oddball back-bencher but most of them are "Anti-Death on the roads" and "Pro-getting to work on time" and so these polorising articles are about nothing more than selling papers to readers who have already made up their minds.

In an ideal world I would prefer it if Mail, Express, Telegraph, guardian, Independent, Times, Sun, Mirror, Metro; The whole bloody lot just refrained from writing anything on the subject, whether in the "for" or "against" cycling camps...

Clearly that will never happen the next best thing is to try and ignore them (I know, the irony of it all!) and strike up a sensible discourse with the relevant decision makers via groups like the CTC and BC...

quick and easy point scoring article

It's not even a point-scoring exercise, it's a hits-generating exercise. The Daily Mail often runs stories online that don't feature in the paper, as they know they'll drive ad revenue.

I hit a baby panda with a chainsaw the other day - it was messy! But how dare they arrest me before they can prove that it didn't just throw itself onto my chainsaw?!

well had a rapid response from the PCC,

the daily express isn't a member so nothing we can do....

I guess self regulation works well then?

This reads like an amusing parody of anti-cycling articles. The bit about loving cycling as they go spinning in the gym, comedy gold!

It's not even a point-scoring exercise, it's a hits-generating exercise

Pretty sure someone on here a while back said stop posting links to these stories, paste the article then a link to original (with an advisory to not to add to their traffic) and for top marks an email address link for the relevant editor/complaints department.

which I agree with

PERHAPS it is because my late mother had an affair with a cyclist that I have never had much time for them. I would walk home from school to frequently find his bike propped up against the front gate. Then he would suddenly appear in his ­ludicrous Lycra pretending to have had a puncture. On your bike, mate.

The trouble with cyclists is that they take themselves so very seriously, don’t they?

When they are not running red lights or ­riding on pavements, they are harping on about road safety, as if it is everyone else’s ­responsibility except theirs.

Take Bradley Wiggins’s recent accident. As ever, the driver is guilty before being proved innocent when no one knows exactly who is to blame. It will be for the police to decide whether the driver should have seen the fastest man on two wheels, who for all we know could have been bombing down the A5209 reliving his Tour de France victory.

But, generally, it is never the cyclist’s fault is it? There are plenty out there who don’t even bother to wear helmets. Indeed Boris’s eponymous bikes that tourists can rent in London don’t even come with them.

Surely only someone with a wicker basket for a brain would take to our congested capital on two wheels with only fresh air between their skull and the tarmac?

The driver is guilty before being proved innocent
Plenty do. Then they complain that London should be “more like Amsterdam”, seemingly forgetting that the city is seven times as big and home to 10 times as many people.

There are other kamikaze cyclists who think nothing of riding at night without any lights. Protective clothing? Nah, fluorescent yellow is not my colour, I’ll stick to black. Then when they get knocked off their bike and killed, no one dares question why on earth they were allowed to pedal around in pitch darkness in the first place. No, the driver is always to blame.

Don’t get me wrong, I actually love cycling. I just choose to do it in the safety and comfort of a spinning class at the gym.

Most Mamils (middle-aged men in Lycra) have what can only be described as an “all the gear but no idea” mentality. They dress like Bradley Wiggins but ride their bicycles with the skill of Christopher Biggins.
When I was living in Kingston-upon-Thames, I lost count of the number of cyclists who used to think nothing of riding in the middle of the road, having a chat, seemingly oblivious to other road users, including pedestrians.

If you dared beep your horn, you would ­invariably be subjected to a foul-mouthed tirade. It was even worse on Sundays, when these leotard-wearing “gods” behaved as if they had divine right to dominate the roads.

Of course we all want cyclists to be safe, be they Bradley Wiggins or the paperboy, and British Cycling has called on the Government to make cycling safer by building it into the design of new roads and transport projects. Now that is all very well but cyclists must assume equal responsibility to drivers if they want to be treated as equals on the roads.

Drivers have to pass a test, so why don’t ­cyclists? Drivers have to wear seatbelts, so why don’t cyclists have to wear helmets and reflective clothing? If vehicles must have MoTs to prove their roadworthiness, why don’t bikes?

When it comes to road safety, it is not drivers who must change gear but cyclists.

cheers rich...i think*.
What a horrible little woman

BTW how much editing has stabiliser done to [url= http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/the-terrible-journalists-guide-to-writing-an-article-about-bicycles/ ]that article[/url] since posting in september, wiggins bit obviously and I guess the mother/cyclist affair bit...or is he/she spookily accurate 😉

*my BP has risen

Contact info of the online editor if anyone is interested:

Express Website: Online Editor - Geoff Marsh

Email: geoff.marsh@express.co.uk

Sadly unless you visit the article itself you miss out on the comments - like this one!

BIGOT!

14.11.12, 12:05pm

Where to start with you bile filled extremist rant?

All cyclists run red lights do they? Well, you are a 'journalist' so therefore you are a disgusting piece of vermin guilty of hacking Milly Dowler's voicemail, yes? Or is that generalising and stereotyping?

It will be for the police to decide about the guilt will it? Maybe in your fascist utopian police state, but here in England & Wales we have Magistrates Courts who decide guilt in minor road traffic collisions such as this - and bombing down the A5209? What's the speed limit there? Does the speed limit apply to bicycles? No! Even Bradley will have to exert himself massively to maintain a speed of 30mph on a section of road - so what is 'bombing'? Oh and it was widely reported that the female driver was reported for summons prior to your 'piece'. Do keep up with the news if you are going to share your ill informed opinion.

Plenty out there who never wear helmets? That's correct but also not an offence in this country, it is optional - unlike speeding, wearing of seat belts, using a mobile phone etc - all of which I (as a police officer) have prosecuted many drivers for. Do all drivers commit road traffic offences? NO! Of course not!

Just because London is bigger than Amsterdam is not a case for removing cycles from the road either - just think if every cyclist commuter got off their bike and back into their cars - because, yes - SHOCK HORROR - most cyclists are motorists too!!!! GRIDLOCK!!!!!

Cyclists in the middle of the road - do please check the Highway Code, and all current relevant safety information you ill informed bigot.

My Wife was knocked down while wearing, hi-viz gear, a helmet and on a brand new non-MOT'able bicycle by a driver who was at fault due to being incompetent.

Your piece is just stereotypical bigotted bile because, oh woe is you, your late Mother chose to have an affair with someone who rode a bicycle. What sort of Daughter outs there dead Mother as an adultress?? The next time a there is a 'black on black' killing in central London, will you write a piece on how EVERY young black male is going to either stab or shoot you? No, of course you wouldn't - or at least you I hope you wouldn't.

There is room on the roads for everyone to share, what does need to be removed from the roads are bigotted vermin who think that saving themselves 4 seconds is more important than saving someones life

Email: geoff.marsh@express.co.uk

mailed

You guys do realise she doesn't work for the Daily Express right? She actually works for the Sunday Express - totally different paper with different editorial.

Gutter hack in sensationalist ill-informed rant shocker.

Who do you blame more, the idiot who wrote the piece or the idiots who buy the Daily Express?

Who do you blame more, the idiot who wrote the piece or the idiots who buy the [s]Daily [/s] Sunday Express?

FIFY

I've just emailed the journalist to suggest that she accompany me on my evening cycle commute.

I wonder what her response will be?

😆

Already agreed to ride with someone else now, you're too late!
https://twitter.com/CamillaTominey/status/268713723869409280

https://twitter.com/CamillaTominey/status/268713521766879233

[quote=geetee1972 ]You guys do realise she doesn't work for the Daily Express right? She actually works for the Sunday Express - totally different paper with different editorial.

Same website, same owner, same crock of shit.

Same website, same owner, same crock of shit.

Is he the pornographer or is that the Daily Fail?

Be interesting to see what she writes up after she's been out for her ride (as per Twitter links)
She didn't write that piece innocently so I doubt she's really up for conversion...

Is he the pornographer

*i was aware he owned ahem specialist magazines, had to [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Desmond ]google[/url] for the titles, honest

Christ, I can't believe people are giving the stupid bitch so much of their time. I'd push her in front of a car if she went riding with me.