The Chainlink

Need talking point help-- bike safety

Hiya folks,
If you knew you were going to be interviewed for a TV news spot, and you knew from talking to the reporter that the piece was on the waves of new cyclists hitting the streets in teh warm weather, and you knew that you were being approached specifically for something safety-related, what points would you want to make sure you got out there?

Looking to generate a list and pare it down, thanks.

Views: 93

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on April 18, 2010 at 4:08pm
I think you've all made a lot of good points here. To pare it down to a 20 second sound bite, I'd say something like this:

Ride predictably in the direction of traffic. Stop at red lights. Use lights and reflectors to be visible. Pay attention to other traffic. Use common sense and yield when appropriate. We all need to share the road.
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on April 19, 2010 at 6:01pm
Thanks to all. Glad that's over. Not much of an opportunity to touch on specifc safety tips . . . not sure exactly what this piece is going to be about :-)
Permalink Reply by Curt H Moore on April 20, 2010 at 5:40am
Great points now go back to Gary Gilberts comment "30 seconds" If you can't get your point accross in 30 seconds or less they will edit at will.....
Permalink Reply by Todd Allen on April 21, 2010 at 9:52am
If there was time it might have been good to mention that as the number of cyclists increase the safety of all cyclists tends to go up. I think due to drivers becoming more aware of cyclists, expecting and watching for them.
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on April 21, 2010 at 12:23pm
It was a very strange interview. I did get this point out there but I really have no idea what the piece will encompass. There was very little about safety in the end, at least in terms of the questions posed to me.

Todd Allen said:
If there was time it might have been good to mention that as the number of cyclists increase the safety of all cyclists tends to go up. I think due to drivers becoming more aware of cyclists, expecting and watching for them.
Permalink Reply by Barry Niel Stuart on April 21, 2010 at 2:54pm
One, that bicycles are vehicles, too, that we must follow the same rules as the motorists including riding with other traffic, not against it. Many improperly trained newbies ride against traffic, not with it, and not wearing a helmet is bad enough. Two, motorists and bicyclists must share the road together. Many non-cycling motorists still have a concept of a bicyclist as a five-year-old on a 20" coaster brake bike on the sidewalk instead of an adult on a 27-speed tourer on the street. Three, bicycling is just as rational a choice as motoring. Where I live on Milwaukee's East Side, the City of Milwaukee DPW is very quick to ticket and tow cars. This is a major source of revenue to the city. Tickets and towing fees cost, not only in the fees themselves, but also in the lost work time and wages from having to take off work to locate and retrieve a towed car. You can expect a hard time at the impound lot.
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on April 24, 2010 at 2:27am
So, here it is:
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/special_report/20100422-bike-r...

Yeah, it did turn out to be the kind of horrible "cycling is dangerous, ride at your own peril" piece I suspected it was going to be. I can live with the little quote they used, and am glad they used something I said rather than just made something up about how Ghost Bikes are placed to remind people that cycling is dangerous, although I did take pains to make sure they were aware that placing the bikes was a collaborative effort spread out among many, so if it reads otherwise it's 100% sloppy editing.

I made many points that would have saved this piece, but no surprise they're going to surgically extract whatever fits their angle.

I didn't watch the vid-- maybe someone can tell me if I'm in it . . . .
Permalink Reply by heather s on April 24, 2010 at 4:38pm
Maybe you're watched it by now, but yes, you're in it. You've made it your mission to commemorate cyclists killed in traffic with ghost bikes. You had a nice quote about making cyclists feel like they are part of a supportive community, but somehow the reporter made it seem as though the goal is to... I don't know... make cyclists feel that their deaths will not be in vain?

It most certainly was a 'OMG cycling is so dangerous look at all these cyclist deaths people aren't wearing helmets blahblahblah' sort of piece. The amount of time spent talking to the ER doctor about the kinds of injuries cyclists come in with was not helpful or instructive, imo. Also, referring to the kid who was recently killed on the south side, the reporter said 'collided with a pickup truck.' really?! child in a crosswalk collided with a truck?

But, he also talked about some infrastructure improvements CDOT is looking into, like raised bike lanes and bike boulevards. And, I think importantly, pointed out that distracted drivers are a major cause of car-bike collisions. And the reporter said that he rode his bike that day, which is nice I suppose.


H3N3 said:
So, here it is:
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/special_report/20100422-bike-r...

Yeah, it did turn out to be the kind of horrible "cycling is dangerous, ride at your own peril" piece I suspected it was going to be. I can live with the little quote they used, and am glad they used something I said rather than just made something up about how Ghost Bikes are placed to remind people that cycling is dangerous, although I did take pains to make sure they were aware that placing the bikes was a collaborative effort spread out among many, so if it reads otherwise it's 100% sloppy editing.

I made many points that would have saved this piece, but no surprise they're going to surgically extract whatever fits their angle.

I didn't watch the vid-- maybe someone can tell me if I'm in it . . . .
Permalink Reply by Dr. Doom on April 24, 2010 at 7:40pm
Ugh, this is just a sore spot with me but on the off chance any reporters are reading this DO NOT WRITE THIS KIND OF GRAF:

Brian Steele with CDOT, the Chicago Department of Transportation, said that since 2004 the city has been averaging about five fatalities and just over a thousand accidents a year.

THIS DOES NOT MEAN ANYTHING. It's like saying a ballplayer had 80 hits last year—it's good if he had 200 at bats, not so good if he had 700 at bats. When you write something like this you are actively making the people who read it less informed than they were. The useful metric is how many X per Y.
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on April 24, 2010 at 8:50pm
And, I think importantly, pointed out that distracted drivers are a major cause of car-bike collisions
That's a bit of consolation, I guess. I did say that we're in the midst of a "distracted driving epidemic" and that seemed to cause the guy's ears to perk up a bit.
The inclusion of the recent fatality on the south side in the litany of peril and doom (sorry, doctor) was my fault . . . he hadn't known about it.

So in the end, I guess I don't know what's worse-- the tired but ever-recurring angle of "drivers vs. cyclists" or the "bicycling is dangerous" angle as a stand-alone.
Permalink Reply by Craig S. on April 24, 2010 at 10:09pm
I just watched this and I'm not surprised, Saxenmeyer is a fucking moron, I doubt he can ride his bicycle more than two miles and even then, it's on a sidewalk. That however, isn't important, what is important is his gross editorializing. How in the hell does he know that every cyclist is riding a bike to "save the world."? Is that really my purpose? Fucking condescending prick. Just like FOX, terrify everyone first and then offer up some points that perhaps drivers are distracted. Really? Ya don't fucking say, Saxonmeyer.

Read the comments after the FOX article and there's a point of view that isn't far off the mark. Drivers think we are the ones causing and deserving of accidents. I've said it before, there are just as many douche-bags on two wheels as there driving four.

FOX is the worst outlet for information on a local, regional and national level, it amazes me after all these years it's still alive and that people actually think it's a source for accurate information. The other networks are not much better.
Permalink Reply by Joe TV on April 25, 2010 at 1:37am
Wow. I didn't think that story was necessarily off the mark, or unfair. unfocused and unnecessary perhaps, but I don't think he did cyclists a disservice. I would recommend the young gentleman who suffered some "cognitive" damage after being hit to consider wearing a helmet.

Craig S. said:
I just watched this and I'm not surprised, Saxenmeyer is a fucking moron, I doubt he can ride his bicycle more than two miles and even then, it's on a sidewalk. That however, isn't important, what is important is his gross editorializing. How in the hell does he know that every cyclist is riding a bike to "save the world."? Is that really my purpose? Fucking condescending prick. Just like FOX, terrify everyone first and then offer up some points that perhaps drivers are distracted. Really? Ya don't fucking say, Saxonmeyer.

Read the comments after the FOX article and there's a point of view that isn't far off the mark. Drivers think we are the ones causing and deserving of accidents. I've said it before, there are just as many douche-bags on two wheels as there driving four.

FOX is the worst outlet for information on a local, regional and national level, it amazes me after all these years it's still alive and that people actually think it's a source for accurate information. The other networks are not much better.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service