Telegraph slammed for manipulating photos of “law-abiding people exercising” for column claiming “speeding cyclists” endanger drivers… despite riders averaging 14.6mph
Telegraph slammed for manipulating photos of “law-abiding people exercising” for column claiming “speeding cyclists” endanger drivers… despite riders averaging 14.6mph
You're viewing a single thread.
14.6 mph is pretty fast when you don't obey stop signs, stop lights, or any other traffic law, and refuse to wear any high vis safety equipment....
Also, the original headline says theyale it unsafe for pedestrians.
But then, the biking website you link just flat out fucking lied about that, even tho they have a screenshot that shows that they lied about it...
The irony of complaining about only looking at screenshots when you clearly did not read the article.
Quoted from the article itself: "[...] if a substantial minority of cyclists and scooterists are determined to endanger the lives of pedestrians, and in some cases motorists [...]"
The biking website didn't lie, they referenced what the original author wrote.
The article did cherry-pick, twist and misconstrue what was in the article, ignored the cited study that was the actual basis and instead chose to focus on... the photo?
Journalists nowadays tend to use barely-related stock photos for most articles anyway and besides, average speed does not equate to following speed limit, particularly in an urban environment which dictates frequent stops and slowdowns - as cyclists complaining about dangerous drivers should be well aware of.
Road.cc is chronic for that kind of thing. They have a "near miss of the week" section on their site - they thrive on being exactly the sort of irritating cyclists people get annoyed at.
Their primary product is rage bait and mediocre review content.