Teen Bicyclist’s Head Run Over By SUV: Story | Video
On how many levels did the cyclist fail to ensure her safety? She was riding on the sidewalk, against traffic, at night and she didn’t have the skills to stop her bike without flying over the handlebars. Good thing she was wearing a helmet.
And to take the cake, the background video shows two cyclists riding at night, without lights, against traffic — one on the sidewalk and one in the bike lane — as if that was normal.
Thus, as usual, the media perpetuates superstition and ensures no one will learn anything useful. Bicycling dangerous. Wear helmet.
I know this is nothing new. I just still have the misguided romantic notion that the news media should serve the public good.
And from the entries in the comments section, there aren’t any cyclists in Salem capable of countering this nonsense. “Don’t buy a lightweight bike and you won’t flip over the handlebars.” Sheesh. Well at least they have bike lanes and helmets to keep them safe.
But on a more constructive note, we could get a gang of cycling blogs to keep an eye on the media and work on correcting them. (Must be done tactfully; the usual blogosphere vitriol will only alienate.)
You’re assuming they care about accuracy.
Am I too cynical?
Keri, I try to be cynical, but it is hard to keep up! (<— Swiped from Lilly Tomlin)
They’re reporting what the deputies told them, with stock footage added.” Should the story have been – “deputies fed us a bunch of tripe which we dutifully spout back?”
Too cynical? Hmmm. No comment.
Journalists (or “people who write for TV news and newspapers”) harbor the same ill-informed assumptions as most folks, but are at least trained to listen to experts and weigh evidence. Worth a shot.
The Orlando Sentinel recently reported that an FHP officer told them a dead pedestrian “failed to notice the approaching car.” “Dutifully spouted back,” or did the reporter assume FHP officers can speak with the dead? Hard to tell.
NOW, the story has been picked up by OTHER news outlets:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010227052_helmet08m.html
Without the video, it’s clearer what’s going on. Comments on this one mostly have not had time to develop into their full, brainless glory, however. Perhaps Bell helmet sales are down?
Here is an article that recommends wearing a helmet while walking.
Bicycle helmet saves the day — on foot
http://www.examiner.com/x-2429-Bicycle-Transportation-Examiner~y2009m11d3-Bicycle-helmets-saves-the-day–on-foot
Putting on my journalism professor hat: In many coverage situations, the news media speak with the voice they consider the standard in the culture, i.e. the voice of the the authority they recognize as legitimate for a given situation. In the case of bicycle accidents, the press is going to follow the characterizations of the police. The press has no incentive to follow other authority. Or, rather, they have a big disincentive to avoid characterizations outside standard lines of authority.
The press creates its stories around set master narratives with set plots, set protagonists, and set antagonists. Once fixed, a master narrative is damned difficult to change because the press merely sees the created narrative as reality.
The press is, however, vulnerable to attack in regard to accuracy. It takes a sustained effort by a would-be new authority to challenge a master narrative and the authorized characterizations upon which it is built.
Here’s something you can do: Identify the reporters mostly likely to cover bicycle issues. Take them for a ride (in all the ways one can understand that phrase). Show them a new way of understanding. Then follow up. And follow up. And follow up. And correct the record when appropriate.
Reporters are vulnerable to schmoozing. The more you do it the more chance you have to influence their messages.
Andy, thanks! I was hoping you’d weigh in on this one.
Reporters interested in seeking truth that runs counter the popular mythology seem fewer and farther between every day.
Keri… I’m thinking about adding some detail to this on CT this week. It’s a problem.
Here’s something you can do: Identify the reporters mostly likely to cover bicycle issues. Take them for a ride (in all the ways one can understand that phrase). Show them a new way of understanding. Then follow up. And follow up. And follow up. And correct the record when appropriate.
You can start with Roman Mica ;-P
Oh… and thanks for not pointing out my double-negative logic break-down
That sentence ought to have read: “Or, rather, they have a big disincentive to accept characterizations outside standard lines of authority.”
That’s why I love my “edit” button
I look forward to reading your post on this topic. It is a big problem and you’re the best qualified bike blogger to take it on!
It seems to me a “Point of View” column can achieve a lot of positive results. After all, reporters read their own paper, one would think. I’ve done several locally over the years, as well as numerous “letters to the editor” on bicycling.
Wayne