• I wouldn't recommend getting too riled by an ephemeral article like this. They're ten a penny. It's best to address its shortcomings, e.g. the blatant errors falling short of basic journalistic standards and leave it at that.

    There is a particular streak in sections of the British press that means journalists are almost proud of being prejudiced (perhaps 'standing by your story'?) and simplifying things into inaccuracy. Petrol Nelly's is only the latest in a long line of articles like this, and at least, unlike Matthew Parris, she doesn't advocate injuring cyclists.

    All that comes out of her article is a case of cyclist inferiority complex. This is routinely encountered in people who assume that since it's for poor and unsuccessful, and also quite lawless, people, cycling must be an unskilled activity, and certainly one which people with a certain 'superior' social pedigree can pick up jus' like that.

    As regular forum readers will know, the road to success for Ms Wyatt lies in taking cycle training lessons which will enhance her enjoyment of cycling. Like many people who don't think of traffic as a social environment, she was unprepared for the degree and awareness of interactivity that being on a bike demands of her. She doesn't understand traffic and as a result had a miserable experience, which we of course wouldn't wish on anyone.

    She'll then be able to write a nicely balanced article in which she will admit to understanding that licensing for cyclists isn't really required, but that training and skill in sharing the street very much are. She'll understand that cycling can be a high-status activity and she'll gain plenty of enjoyment from it.

About