Near Miss of the Day 27: Tailgaiting driver inches from rider's rear wheel - then issues threats

Chougher wrote:

I really hate these 'miss of the day' stories, and they do nothing for cycling. In fact, they hold back cycling debate, as they just make people angry - leading to more clicks for road.cc, and that means more dollars in their bank, so I doubt they will go away anytime soon.

Instead, road.cc should concentrate on getting people to respect cycling and cyclists as users of road infrastructure, alongside pedestrians, horse riders, and, I dunno, pogo stick jumpers. But this takes more than 'gosh golly look at this awful white van man', so I absolutely don't expect this to happen. 

 

Completely agree.  It's crazy - people thinking about taking up cycling might come to this site, see these articles and go "wow, I might die.  Think I'll take up table tennis instead."  I'm sure the intention is to highlight that the danger comes from cars and not inherently from the act of cycling, but this doesn't come across in the writing or social media promotion of these articles.

Chougher wrote:

I really hate these 'miss of the day' stories, and they do nothing for cycling. In fact, they hold back cycling debate, as they just make people angry - leading to more clicks for road.cc, and that means more dollars in their bank, so I doubt they will go away anytime soon.

They might make some people angry. I personally get more angered by MGIFers every now and then risking leaving my kids without a dad just to get to the lights in front of me.

They also generate a fuckton of debate BTL, leading to other articles being shared etc.

Besides, what's wrong with a bit of anger, or righteous indignation? In the face of a society that has accepted the car as king, is casually alienating cyclists from its road network, and accepting their deaths on it, where's the harm in a bit of an increase in heart rate? The motons have the Clarksons, the trollumnists to raise their blood pressure and make them feel justified in putting cyclists in their place. Where are our High Priests of The Stupids to counter that?

Chougher wrote:

Instead, road.cc should concentrate on getting people to respect cycling and cyclists as users of road infrastructure, alongside pedestrians, horse riders, and, I dunno, pogo stick jumpers. But this takes more than 'gosh golly look at this awful white van man', so I absolutely don't expect this to happen. 

They do. Or do you have alternative suggestions? Maybe tweeting sensible, rational, evidence-based arguments like Chris Boardman? Publicise the W Mids Police campaign? You might have read about that here - it's been featured a few times. We absolutely need that approach, but it is taking a long time to bear fruit. Meanwhile, over 2 cyclists die per week, the majority of them killed by driver error. That isn't acceptable collateral, to me, and it needs to be addressed now, not in 20 years.

Rational argument, whipping up a bit of anger, and generating a few clicks do not have to be mutually exclusive. Throw other campaigns like the West Mids police one into the mix that is required to overturn *some* motorists' impatience and intolerance shown towards vulnerable rioad users. Can't say I'm a fan of the content, but we need the whole mix in the campaign.

nbrus wrote:

This 'news story' isn't about motorists vs cyclists ... its about two pricks in a car. They would still be pricks if they were on bikes.

This fundamentally highlights the difference in attitudes.

You're quite right, of course. The difference is, that when people see people on bikes being pricks, a sizeable proportion of the public does see that as 'cyclist' behaviour - and then a response to that is to rabble-rouse in awful papers, post on social media about cyclists getting what they deserve, and the justice system seeing cyclist deaths as acceptable collateral.

don simon]<p>[quote wrote:

I still haven't worked out whether this is productive or makes us look like whinging ninnies as not all the close passes have been close.

I reckon both - and I'm in two minds myself. There's so much bias and nonsense to counter, though, that I see it as a bit of an own-goal when reasonable cyclists shut our own biased nonsense down for decent reasons. My argument doesn't make much sense, but neither does the Daily Wail.

davel][quote=don simon wrote:

Quote:

I still haven't worked out whether this is productive or makes us look like whinging ninnies as not all the close passes have been close.

I reckon both - and I'm in two minds myself. There's so much bias and nonsense to counter, though, that I see it as a bit of an own-goal when reasonable cyclists shut our own biased nonsense down for decent reasons. My argument doesn't make much sense, but neither does the Daily Wail.

For whatever reason, we're not wired to get on. Go to Spain and you'll see people who'll encourage and support you. Mistakes are made there but there is very little malice, people apologise for their mistake and don't blame the vivtim. This country is appalling in its desire to do damage, I used to believe that people don't actually go out to knock over or kill cyclists, now I'm not so sure.

The press plays a very large part in the formation of public thinking and how people think that can treat others.

Yesterday's ride saw me nearly taken out by an unleashed dog. The owner was more concerned about me being out of control because I had used the word "bloody", you can imagine how that ended.  No apology or even recognition that the dog was out of ontrol.

Leviathan wrote:

Okay, forget all the stupid muffled effs on both sides... What about the slow cyclist daudling through the red lights at 1:30? This is exactly the kind of shit that causes problems. A lot of people on road.cc decry 'collective responsibility' and I agree, I am not responsible for others actions. But bad cycling and RLJ allow berks in hot hatches the benefit of the doubt to be dicks to any other cyclist getting in their way.

The kind of berks who think like that will hate cyclists for plenty of reasons other than some doing RLJs. They're fed them on a daily basis.

If you want to rail against anything, target the opinion formers, the dodgy MPs, the lazy journalists and the moton lobby groups who perpetuate cyclists constituting an outgroup and apologist arguments for squashing a few every now and then.

@drosco: yes, it's boring, but I'd rather have noise like this to counter the sheer volume of anti-cycling nonsense that has infected the mainstream media, rather than nothing. Just look at the recent 'jogger pushes ped into the road' story, which turned into an excuse for rentagobs to have a pop at cyclists. It's a propaganda war.

Leviathan wrote:

Okay, forget all the stupid muffled effs on both sides... What about the slow cyclist daudling through the red lights at 1:30? This is exactly the kind of shit that causes problems. 

Sorry but someone riding steadily and sensibly is not the cause of other people getting impatient and losing it!

SteveAustin wrote:

2:10 if you get bored of watching a bloke riding slowly in primary....

and it's all over by 3:20

SteveAustin wrote:

2:10 if you get bored of watching a bloke riding slowly in primary....

and stop after the sweary bit, as there's no further interest.

I'm sure it wasn't a nice experience for the poster, but seems pretty normal for that there London. Wave 'em back and don't bother arguing.

Dr_Lex wrote:

SteveAustin wrote:

2:10 if you get bored of watching a bloke riding slowly in primary....

and stop after the sweary bit, as there's no further interest.

I'm sure it wasn't a nice experience for the poster, but seems pretty normal for that there London. Wave 'em back and don't bother arguing.

Maybe so but doesn't make it right.