Short piece on BBC Breakfast with Chris Boardman, on cycling in cities. Nothing particularly revealing or controversial: cities are a bit shit for cycling.
In the studio round-up after the report, the final word from the presenter (who had accompanied Chris) was a short, factual statement that although she had been wearing a helmet, Chris hadn't because he thinks they're unnecessary.
Being apropos of nothing else and incongruously tagged on at the end, it was clearly a "don't try this at home" warning and the inference being that Chris was doing something dangerous and ill-advised.
Why no mention that she was wearing a fluorescent jacket and he was in "civvies"?
Short piece on BBC Breakfast with Chris Boardman, on cycling in cities. Nothing particularly revealing or controversial: cities are a bit shit for cycling.
In the studio round-up after the report, the final word from the presenter (who had accompanied Chris) was a short, factual statement that although she had been wearing a helmet, Chris hadn't because he thinks they're unnecessary.
Being apropos of nothing else and incongruously tagged on at the end, it was clearly a "don't try this at home" warning and the inference being that Chris was doing something dangerous and ill-advised.
Why no mention that she was wearing a fluorescent jacket and he was in "civvies"?
So much for informed, impartial broadcasting...