The BTA board member Steven McKiernan takes issue with the way newspapers tolerate violent comments against cyclists. Similar comments would be racist, and probably illegal, if they were applied to minority groups.
The letter follows:
From: steven mckiernan
To: newtona@perthnow.newsltd.com.au
Subject: Reportage of cycling in Sunday Times, Perth Now.
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:29:55 +0800
CC: alison.xamon@mp.wa.gov.au; chris.tallentire@mp.wa.gov.au; mediawatch@your.abc.net.au; bta_wa@hotmail.com; kend.travers@mp.gov.au; simon.o’brien@mp.wa.gov.au; roger.cook@mp.wa.gov.auAllen
The story I wish to take issue is this:http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,26260069-948,00.html
Sure the person who allegedly did this assault deserves some form of public approbation.
Thugs everywhere deserve bad press and strong criminal sanction, bus drivers deserve protection from assault and the public need to know that physical violence or the threat of violence is not condoned.Unfortunately PerthNow is offering an anonymous site to make further threats of violence, and PerthNow could easily be accused of inciting such threats. In this case the journalist Rhys Haynes did a very good balanced report of the incident, yet the response is so far beyond the original story, that it has turned into a general whinge against users of sustainable transport and cycling in general.
However, the comments on your website Perth Now lead me to believe that you are sanctioning violence against one sector of the community based upon a lifestyle choice by permitting threats of violence to exist in the comments section in this website article. Previous mentions of cyclist bad behaviour results in another wave of dog-whistling redneck reaction where the actions of one person are used as justification for running legitimate road users off the road by virtue of “might is right”.
Imagine if someone wrote they hated all asians, or aborigines or gay people, or air conditioning salesmen and justified using a deadly weapon wielded with intent to injure? Would News Corporation publish those views?
We have legislation to prevent people and sanction people if they make threats to injure or to vilify based on a range of grounds.
Here’s a snapshot of some of the comments:
“they deserve to get run over riding illegally” – Posted by: Old Hairy Ears of Inner Eastern 8:28am today Comment 4 of 75
“At least these idiot cyclists would make a good speed-hump for a bus” -Robin Graves of Karrakatta 10:14am today Comment 9 of 75
“Come to far off the verge and into my path and you can expect a wing mirror or front bumper too push you aside,” – Posted by: ??? of … 1:57pm today Comment 53 of 75
“Who else wants to open the passenger door when you drive past them on the road I know I do” – Posted by: I have an opinion of 1:58pm today Comment 54 of 75
“Next time the 64 year old might use you for a speed bump…heres hoping.” – Posted by: MitchoCaliante of Canningvale 2:57pm today Comment 68 of 75
“I’m ITCHING to open the car door nearest these cyclists when they come whizzing past, too close and too arrogant.” – Posted by: MW of Western Suburbs, Perth 2:58pm today Comment 69 of 75
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/comment/publication
2. These terms and conditions are subject to change at the sole discretion of News.Clearly these comments go through moderation by someone at PerthNow before publication.
I would like to know why threats of violence to a section of the community are permitted by the management of PerthNow. What is to be achieved by such an approach?Even when a cyclist is deliberately (or negligently) run down by a car driver, the comments section inevitably descends into vilification and again threats of violence.
Examples can be found in the following articles:
1 http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/comments/0,21590,24016093-2761,00.html
2 http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/comments/0,21590,24841836-2761,00.html
3 http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/comments/0,21590,23787491-2761,00.html
4 http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/comments/0,21590,25120185-5017006,00.html
Its stupid beyond belief and should not be tolerated by your organisation.
Allen, come and talk with us.
Steven McKiernan
Board Member Bicycle Transportation Alliance of WA Inc.
It is hard to write this sort of media behaviour off as just sloppy journalism practice when it appears to be a long standing and widely condoned occurrence. Wheels of Justice has a dossier (http://www.woj.com.au/anti-cyclist-media-bias) of ongoing anti-cyclist reportage; and publications that run out and out anti-cycling columns, [eg see Luke McIlveen of News Ltd (http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-one-cyclist-i-actually-like) and the comments he incites] or which run relatively balanced news stories but then allow vilifying comments to be freely published, eg see the comments following Rivers’ story about speed reduction (http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25120185-948,00.html) appear to be actively inciting anti-cyclist sentiment.
The phenomenon isn’t restricted to Australia, either, with both US and UK media outlets recently following the same pattern of “coverage”.
I wonder if these guys invest in oil as well as News? I suspect not. More likely, the News services are trying to boost comment / in-bound links and popularity simply by appealing to the human proclivity towards the negative. I know myself, that the way to garner inbound links on a website (and therefore readership and the constantly shifting advertising dollar) is to write negatively. Perhaps we should do some negative stuff ourselves.
As an afterthought – I heard similar, but slightly less ramped up, anti-triathlete sentiment being fanned on talk back radio yesterday afternoon. People were inconvienced on Sunday because they couldn’t drive their cars through a couple of the city streets due to the World Long Course Triathlon Championships being held here. Fit athletes from all over the place blocking the streets to race for a world championship; their attendant touristing supporters spending money here and enjoying the city; cars being diverted – it was an outrage.
I was talking to Heinrich today, the subject being the perceived ownership of the roads by motorists.
As a motorist and cyclist who spends more time cycling than driving my car, I consider myself more a cyclist than a motorist.
Thus when I pay my council rates I pay them more as a cyclist than as a motorist, and a portion of my rates (as a cyclist) go into the construction and maintenance of the shire’s roads.
Likewise, when I buy goods at my local shopping centre a portion of the cost goes to paying for the transport costs and this is my contribution (as a cyclist) towards the commercial vehicles on the roads. The truck owner passes a portion of this to the government to build new and maintain existing roads. The truck owner is a tax collecter for the government(s), he is not paying for the roads out of his money, it is from money I have given to him to give to the government.
If there is one class of road user who frequently pays nothing for the private use of the roads, it is the motorist who has private use of a company car or truck.
Unfortunately, these are frequently unmarked vehicles, but there are thousands of them on the roads and we as cyclists are helping to pay for their use of the roads.
Thanks for taking this up. This is actually the bit I find most frustrating about these reports – they actively vilify a group of people who have done nothing wrong, simply for existing.
There’s one even more extreme case like this one
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26692804-27197,00.html
Can you elaborate?