The Daily Mail hates cycling

its shit is poor altogether

but i will get the royal wedding edition

Fuck off!

It's a poorly put together peace of shit.

like the Create?

Fuck off!

It's a poorly put together peace of shit.

To be fair it is very low cost. You do get what you pay for, and they're not nearly as bad as they could be given that they're only priced at about 20p.

Having said that I'd still rather walk than be seen dead riding around on one.

Sorry if repost, but the NHS says the Daily Fail can fuck off too.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/02February/pages/air-pollution-cycling-heart-attack-risk.aspx

How many people have heart attack on the job? Stop to work and ride a bike!

CLassic Daily Mail..

Fuck off!

It's a poorly put together peace of shit.

Are you talking about the bike or the Mail? If the latter, couldn't agree more ;)

David

The DM is back to cyclist bashing.

In case anyone missed it, the Daily Mail yesterday started a campaign against cycle lanes and by default, cyclists.

It's all nonsense of course but it's stirred up some strong anti-cyclist sentiment.

I saw it too. Specifically aimed at the Mail reading knuckledraggers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3824340/Cycle-lane-madness-Britain-Mail-Online-readers-reactions.html

Thereader's reactions piece today makes for depressing/frightening reading.

Be safe everyone.

If anyone wants to complain:

https://www.ipso.co.uk/make-a-complaint/

as I'd imagine it breaches the 'accuracy' and 'public interest' sections of the Editor's Code Of Practice, as well as stirring up hatred.

"As a cyclist I do not pay road tax on my bicycles, so I do not expect a cycle lane paid for by the taxpayer."

In Hyde Park, the wide cycle track looks like an unused major roadway

I was wondering about this the other day.

Who is responsible for the re-design? It strikes me as a bit of a mess. It's empty because it's not obvious as to what you are supposed to do with it!

The photos of empty cycle lanes in that Mail article are supposed to be from readers. They appear to be from Mail staff photographers. Bradley Page.

They made a massive pig's ear of the Leeds-Bradford cyclepath. They've made a huge mess of the design so its dangerous, and have recommended a 10mph top speed on it to mitigate the poor design. At the same time pissed away £30m of public money.

http://road.cc/content/news/151843-new-leeds-bradford-cycle-superhighway-slammed-dangerous-design-changes-offers-no

Are cyclist groups ever consulted on design? Supposed for this they were, but then the recommendations ignored. Now you have a white elephant of a cyclepath that in one sport is only 75cm wide that people aren't going to use, but will only encourage driver antipathy towards cyclists for not using it.

Two-way section:

Linking to the D M kills brain cells and you fuckers need all of them you can get.

Daily mail reader.....

Oh god why did I watch that video. Infuriating.

I know I shouldn't read the comments but I loved this completely practical idea

Cyclists are responsible for injuring thousands of pedestrians every year. Existing laws need to be enforced to reduce this carnage. New legislation is required to ensure no cyclist comes within 5 feet of a pedestrian.

It's all to do with their emnity towards News International and the Murdochs. The latter support cycling, through their sponsorship of both British Cycling and Team Sky, plus editorial support from The Times following the appalling injuries Mary Bowers, a Times journalist, suffered when she was hit by a truck in London.

In the mind Paul Dacre this makes cycling a fair target for the Mail, and it resonates a lot with his readership who don't like anything that isn't 'normal'.

resonates a lot with his readership who don't like anything.

How do cycle lanes increase pollution please?

Because they stop cars traveling at double the speed limit at all times... apparently.

Next week: What's up with pavements? They could be lanes for cars too.

And so much more room for parking.

A lot of talk on twitter about how the Mail is also responding to pressure against cycling by motor/oil industry. Entirely plausable, given the habit of ALL the papers to publish 'news' that fits in with PR from their advertisers.