Even if I had a twitter account . . . nothing for the F*cks "News."
But thanks for the info, Ace Mann :)
I see reporting has sunk to the level of Twitter. Lovely.
Ace, I think you need to change the heading to "FoxChicago looking for doored riders for story in 140 characters or less" :)
Fox local news ≠ Faux "News" Network but I would still not assume they're looking to promote bicyclist's rights in any way-- much more likely the angle is simply "bicycling is dangerous" (although the false "bikes vs. cars" dichotomy is always good for stirring up a little manure.)
If anyone does want to participate I would suggest asking very pointedly what the piece intends to show prior to agreeing. If the answer seems vague, ask again.
Hey, I hate Faux News just as much as the next guy, but getting a major media outlet to cover bicycle rights would be a really positive step for all of us to get more drivers aware of dooring......hopefully. ;)
I agree with JT, I think it is bleeping golden opportunity. Even if the story is going to be short and full of sound bites like most news stories.
In terms of advocacy, the least effective person for a story would be someone who is not very articulate that was drunk when it happened, Did not get hurt seriously, did not seek medical attention, did not call the police, did not sue for damages, hit the windshield of the offending car with a U-lock and rode away.
Now imagine that the imaginary person above has a twitter account and wants to be on TV (Hi mom).
If you think that you can do better and your story could help educate drivers about dooring and then please do it.
I'd stay far away from this. Nobody with an ounce of integrity could ever work for them. If you cooperate with them in any way, you are just asking to be misrepresented/abused/used as fodder for right-wing propaganda. They have a lot more experience abusing people than most of us have with dealing with corporate media. The odds are stacked against you.
That was actually a good story, it was informational and did not really try to stir up and conflict. I would have liked if it had made two things more clear:
1. That it had made it more clear that a dooring is the fault of the person opening the door; I think it was implied but it could have been stated.
2. That they had made mention people should be checking their mirror anyway because opening your door blind is a good way to get it hit my another car. The more fear that is generated over opening a door into traffic the more likely it is to sink in with people. The idea of hitting a cyclist with a door is no were near as likely to leave an impression on a selfish world as the idea of having your door torn off and your arm, and possibly leg, hit by a passing truck.
JR Clark said:
Hmmm. Nice educational piece of reporting.
JR Clark said: