Media controlling you – Cyclist hit, incident caught on video

F

freddofrog

Likes Dirt
Just saw this http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/dashboard-camera-captures-cyclists-crash-20140317-34x4s.html

Typical sensationalism. Emotionally charged phrases like “rammed”, "mowed down" and “ploughing” will go unnoticed by the brain dead populous. However it will greatly influence how idiots interpret the incident and they won’t even realise it.

“Accidentally nudged” would be more appropriate but that isn't controversial enough. If it was intentional as those emotive words suggest, the guy would have been well and truly run over and spat out the back.

I’m guessing what really happened was, she was checking her blind spot trying to find a moment to merge and under estimated the speed of the cyclist, that’s all.

Not sure who is to blame, the media or the population (ie us) who accept it.
 
V

vtwiz

Likes Dirt
"No charges have yet beel laid" Shit drivers get away with so much!
Audi had no indicator either.
 
Last edited:
Knuckles

Knuckles

Lives under a bridge
freddofrog said:
Just saw this http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/dashboard-camera-captures-cyclists-crash-20140317-34x4s.html

Typical sensationalism. Emotionally charged phrases like “rammed”, "mowed down" and “ploughing” will go unnoticed by the brain dead populous. However it will greatly influence how idiots interpret the incident and they won’t even realise it.

“Accidentally nudged” would be more appropriate but that isn't controversial enough. If it was intentional as those emotive words suggest, the guy would have been well and truly run over and spat out the back.

I’m guessing what really happened was, she was checking her blind spot trying to find a moment to merge and under estimated the speed of the cyclist, that’s all.

Not sure who is to blame, the media or the population (ie us) who accept it.
Click to expand...
Newspapers, in particular, tabloids have gone the way of TV news media. Sensationalism sells. With all the layoffs in the print media, journalists are realising the only way to keep your job is to sell papers to the great unwashed, and the only way to sell to Mr & Ms Neverreadapaperbefore is to give them something to be outraged about in their boring little lives. I'm sure next week the same byline will have a equally sensational and emotive story about cyclists flaunting road rules and being a menace. The journalist who generates the most feedback in the letters section wins!

Having said that..............HANG THE BITCH!
 
John U

John U

MTB Precision
The driver of the Audi was at fault. They ran up the rear up the rear of the cyclist.

Awesome effort by the bloke who filmed the incident and then stopped in front, I am guessing, to render assistance. It's not all riders vs. drivers.
 
scblack

scblack

Leucocholic
John U said:
Awesome effort by the bloke who filmed the incident and then stopped in front, I am guessing, to render assistance. It's not all riders vs. drivers.
Click to expand...
I ride road in Sydney a good deal. Genuinely it is RARE I have a problem with motorists. Many are courteous, many are awesome and a very very small minority are dickheads.
 
Quintin

Quintin

Eats Squid
freddofrog said:
Just saw this http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...a-captures-cyclists-crash-20140317-34x4s.html

Typical sensationalism. Emotionally charged phrases like “rammed”, "mowed down" and “ploughing” will go unnoticed by the brain dead populous. However it will greatly influence how idiots interpret the incident and they won’t even realise it.

“Accidentally nudged” would be more appropriate but that isn't controversial enough. If it was intentional as those emotive words suggest, the guy would have been well and truly run over and spat out the back.

I’m guessing what really happened was, she was checking her blind spot trying to find a moment to merge and under estimated the speed of the cyclist, that’s all.

Not sure who is to blame, the media or the population (ie us) who accept it.
Click to expand...
without implying this was intentional, im not sure this is so innocent either. if it really is an "accident" then this person should not be allowed behind a lawn mower let alone a car. they were following WAY too close for quite a while and most likely completely zoned out for longer than is appropriate. maybe texting? changing the music? gps?

and i also wouldnt call it a nudge - the guy went down hard, looked like the rear wheel folded and went under the bar

Yes the cyclist should have been more to the left (i certainly would have been) either way the driver was completely at fault for simply not seeing the guy or purposely following too close.
 
Pastavore

Pastavore

Eats Squid
freddofrog said:
Just saw this http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/dashboard-camera-captures-cyclists-crash-20140317-34x4s.html

Typical sensationalism. Emotionally charged phrases like “rammed”, "mowed down" and “ploughing” will go unnoticed by the brain dead populous. However it will greatly influence how idiots interpret the incident and they won’t even realise it.

“Accidentally nudged” would be more appropriate but that isn't controversial enough. If it was intentional as those emotive words suggest, the guy would have been well and truly run over and spat out the back.

I’m guessing what really happened was, she was checking her blind spot trying to find a moment to merge and under estimated the speed of the cyclist, that’s all.

Not sure who is to blame, the media or the population (ie us) who accept it.
Click to expand...
I reject your emotionally charged phrases, and insert my own.

I would use "negligently" "appalling lack of due care" "astonishingly poor driving ability"

I am sure the driver wasn't deliberately trying to hurt the cyclist, as implied by some of the language used by the journalist. To say "accidentally nudged" is appropriate is like saying the captain of the Costa Concordia "made a little oopsy".

She knew she was behind a vulnerable road user, and failed to take due care. Could very easily have killed him. She should have her license removed, and face a hefty fine and community service.
 
workmx

workmx

Banned
Quintin said:
Yes the cyclist should have been more to the left (i certainly would have been) either way the driver was completely at fault for simply not seeing the guy or purposely following too close.
Click to expand...
No.

It depends on the jurisdictional road rules, but here a cyclist is considered to be a vehicle (and has the same rights and responsiblities). So cyclists can use a whole lane and cars have to safely overtake them, as they would another car. Mind you, that does not always happen.
 
Last edited:
eastie

eastie

Likes Bikes and Dirt
“Accidentally nudged” as you offer as the alternative makes an unfound assumption that it was accidental, and not a deliberate act. Just saying.

Correct = footage shows a car colliding with a bicycle (fact). Beyond that is speculation as to why, how hard and whether there was any intent, maliciousness or distraction culpability involved. Good journo's know the difference, media writers and sub editors who are paid for sensational bs don't or choose to ignore it.

As for riding on the road, not if but when....
 
Mywifesirrational

Mywifesirrational

I however am very normal. Trust me.
John U said:
Awesome effort by the bloke who filmed the incident and then stopped in front, I am guessing, to render assistance. It's not all riders vs. drivers.
Click to expand...
Yeah top bloke, he said he slowed down initially because cars always race up the outside to merge in front. He was fully expecting the audi to so something stupid, just not exactly that.
 
Quintin

Quintin

Eats Squid
workmx said:
No.

It depends on the jurisdictional road rules, but here a cyclist is considered to be a vehicle (and has the same rights and responsiblities). So cyclists can use a whole lane and cars have to safely overtake them, as they would another car. Mind you, that does not always happen.
Click to expand...
Let it be known i'm a courteous driver, look out for cyclists and occasionally (very occasionally) lycra up and hit the road but i'm always on safety's side, die hard road cyclists always argue rules and rights etc but it doesnt work! argue rights all you like and the bogans will always argue rego amongst a myriad of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. But seriously common sense dictates that if you can move over, then do it for crying out loud rules or not just avoid the possibility for some idiot in an audi fucking up! is standing up for some rules that nobody seems to understand or enforce worth ending up in an ambulance for?
 
9

99_FGT

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Quintin said:
Yes the cyclist should have been more to the left (i certainly would have been) either way the driver was completely at fault for simply not seeing the guy or purposely following too close.
Click to expand...
This is on my regular run home. You do not want to be on the left. You are in a slip / drag lane which has space for about 4 cars (legally - but a lot of people cut through the bus lane) before the intersection, and is less than 150m long. To the left of that lane is a highway off ramp with an added lane, and there is a small island separating the two.
I take the lane there regularly, and will take the middle lane (having indicated and merged appropriately) if there is traffic coming off the highway, as they can still be doing 80+ in the 60 zone there, until I can get across.
Have a look at Google Maps (satellite view - just to the North West - heading east from the lights)

Al..
 
Last edited:
Pastavore

Pastavore

Eats Squid
Quintin said:
Let it be known i'm a courteous driver, look out for cyclists and occasionally (very occasionally) lycra up and hit the road but i'm always on safety's side, die hard road cyclists always argue rules and rights etc but it doesnt work! argue rights all you like and the bogans will always argue rego amongst a myriad of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. But seriously common sense dictates that if you can move over, then do it for crying out loud rules or not just avoid the possibility for some idiot in an audi fucking up! is standing up for some rules that nobody seems to understand or enforce worth ending up in an ambulance for?
Click to expand...
I agree, stay left and make room for traffic.........where appropriate. Sometimes (depressingly frequently) there are a gazzillion broken bottles in the left of the lane. Sometimes there is an unsafe drain cover. And sometimes, there is just not enough room in the lane for a car AND a bike. In that circumstance, if you ride as far to the left as possible, an impatient driver will try to squeeze through a gap that is too small and side swipe you. It can be a better decision to ride more centrally so that the vehicle passing needs to find a gap in the adjacent lane, or wait until the road widens.
 
A

Asterope

Likes Dirt
freddofrog said:
I’m guessing what really happened was, she was checking her blind spot trying to find a moment to merge and under estimated the speed of the cyclist, that’s all.
Click to expand...
When one is in a car checking ones blind spot to change lanes/overtake a cyclist, it is generally considered poor form to be following so closely as to be buzzing their wheel :doh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top