Media bias against cyclist in reporting (Shawn Bradley)
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Media bias against cyclist in reporting (Shawn Bradley)
I was sad to see in the news recently that Shawn Bradley, a wonderful human being, was paralyzed when hit from behind by a motorist just one block from his home.
This article points out studies that show how the media skews and mis-reports these events:
"... time after time, media outlets opt for simplistic, flawed framing that distorts public understanding by shifting blame, which in turn hurts the cycling community. It’s almost like they are avoiding facing what—or rather, who—is responsible for these terrible crashes. And that seems like no accident."
This article points out studies that show how the media skews and mis-reports these events:
"... time after time, media outlets opt for simplistic, flawed framing that distorts public understanding by shifting blame, which in turn hurts the cycling community. It’s almost like they are avoiding facing what—or rather, who—is responsible for these terrible crashes. And that seems like no accident."
Likes For matimeo:
Likes For 10 Wheels:
#3
I'm good to go!
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,148
Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020
Liked 5,404 Times
in
3,729 Posts
Media usually screws up any technical facts. More and more it's about being able to sensationalize a report and cause a tug on your emotions. Facts are fewer and fewer and even totally lacking in much of the news I get to see today.
#4
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,118
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Liked 1,649 Times
in
1,110 Posts
Who needs facts about cause(s) of collisions when xperts have the all purpose answer at hand for the cause of every collision? "Cell phones!" Done and Done.
Likes For I-Like-To-Bike:
#5
Senior Member
It's more complicated than that. Although cellphonitis plays a major roll in the increased number of rear end collisions to bicyclists, motorists can be looking in your direction and still not see you. Our perception and what we see are convoluted. when we look ahead and around us as we are driving down the rode. We see what we expect to see. in other words our brain takes in the info and puts the it together. If wee are not looking for anything other than another car we can easily zone out anything else just like it was never there. Because I am always looking for motorcycles, bicycles and pedestrians, I notice them and have never hit anything or anybody. There are ways to defend yourself from celphoneitis and zombie drivers. The brain responds to lights and movement. I have never had even a close call at night. This is because I always use lights. In daylight I have been T-boned. and sideswiped. I currently use a battery powered taillight specifically made for daylight use. I use it on slow pulse mode. The brightness and movement of the light work. I can see people moving to give me room from quite a distance away in my mirror. I never use flashing lights at night.
Likes For Rick:
#6
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,118
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Liked 1,649 Times
in
1,110 Posts
BTW, I have not read on BF or anywhere else any evidence or data of just how significantly the number of bicyclist rear end collisions actually has increased, and if so over what period of time or just how universal/widespread is the alleged increase (rural highways vs urban streets), night vs day, collision numbers vs number of cyclists present on the streets and highways, etc.
Likes For I-Like-To-Bike:
#7
Senior Member
I was sad to see in the news recently that Shawn Bradley, a wonderful human being, was paralyzed when hit from behind by a motorist just one block from his home.
This article points out studies that show how the media skews and mis-reports these events:
"... time after time, media outlets opt for simplistic, flawed framing that distorts public understanding by shifting blame, which in turn hurts the cycling community. It’s almost like they are avoiding facing what—or rather, who—is responsible for these terrible crashes. And that seems like no accident."
This article points out studies that show how the media skews and mis-reports these events:
"... time after time, media outlets opt for simplistic, flawed framing that distorts public understanding by shifting blame, which in turn hurts the cycling community. It’s almost like they are avoiding facing what—or rather, who—is responsible for these terrible crashes. And that seems like no accident."
Did the vehicle swerve into him?
Did he swerve in front of the vehicle?
I have read a few accounts of the incident and none of them had any details.
Likes For downhillmaster:
#8
Full Member
It's more complicated than that. Although cellphonitis plays a major roll in the increased number of rear end collisions to bicyclists, motorists can be looking in your direction and still not see you. Our perception and what we see are convoluted. when we look ahead and around us as we are driving down the rode. We see what we expect to see. in other words our brain takes in the info and puts the it together. If wee are not looking for anything other than another car we can easily zone out anything else just like it was never there.
Likes For Kat12:
#9
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,118
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Liked 1,649 Times
in
1,110 Posts
Or they could be adjusting the radio, yelling at their kids in the back seat, spending too long checking the rearview mirror, reading a billboard, looking at the woman in the red dress, watching the guy next to them who's driving somewhat erratically, eating, reaching for something that fell off the seat, chatting to a passenger, etc. etc. People have been having distracted-driving accidents for far longer than there have been cell phones...
#10
Senior Member
I think we road cyclists get a little taste of what it's like to be in a minority group. The stuff I've had thrown at me, yelled at me and cars actually swerving towards me....after all that I can't imagine driving a car everywhere I go.
That's why I will always stick to the roads -- exerting my right to be there, but in a respectful manner. Peaceful demonstration is a powerful force. Martin Luther King Jr. was absolutely correct.
That's why I will always stick to the roads -- exerting my right to be there, but in a respectful manner. Peaceful demonstration is a powerful force. Martin Luther King Jr. was absolutely correct.
#13
Senior Member
That explains why I smashed into that tree that ran across the road late one night...
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,496
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Liked 8,298 Times
in
3,298 Posts
#15
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Liked 943 Times
in
505 Posts
It's more complicated than that. Although cellphonitis plays a major roll in the increased number of rear end collisions to bicyclists, motorists can be looking in your direction and still not see you. Our perception and what we see are convoluted. when we look ahead and around us as we are driving down the rode. We see what we expect to see. in other words our brain takes in the info and puts the it together. If wee are not looking for anything other than another car we can easily zone out anything else just like it was never there. Because I am always looking for motorcycles, bicycles and pedestrians, I notice them and have never hit anything or anybody. There are ways to defend yourself from celphoneitis and zombie drivers. The brain responds to lights and movement. I have never had even a close call at night. This is because I always use lights. In daylight I have been T-boned. and sideswiped. I currently use a battery powered taillight specifically made for daylight use. I use it on slow pulse mode. The brightness and movement of the light work. I can see people moving to give me room from quite a distance away in my mirror. I never use flashing lights at night.
I think it's the other way around. Something totally unexpected (say a cyclist in neon yellow and flashing lights in the middle of the lane) garners much MORE attention than 'just another car'. ...makes alarms go off in even a distracted brain, where as a stopped car may not.
#16
Senior Member
Have yet to see any details of the crash so as of now the only bias seems to be on the part of the OP
Likes For downhillmaster:
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto, CANADA
Posts: 6,209
Bikes: ...a few.
Liked 410 Times
in
236 Posts
There could be a number of possible causes for this collision--distracted driving, which includes, but not limited to, cellphone use. But the idea that the driver 'saw' the cyclist but didn't actually 'see' him, that is, it didn't register in his brain, is something that I've encountered quite a number of times, most frequently when drivers are making right turns in front of me. They are looking right at me as I am coming through the intersection, and numerous times I've had to slow down or stop to avoid being right-hooked. Also numerous times I've caught up to the driver at the next stop light and confronted them. The common response is, Oh, I didn't even see you. My response is usually, You were looking right at me and you didn't see me with my two brightly flashing/strobing lights and my super fluorescent jacket?! Get the **** off the road and get your eyes checked!!!
I'd be interested in hearing more details the Bradley collision as well.
I'd be interested in hearing more details the Bradley collision as well.
Likes For mcours2006:
#18
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Liked 1,057 Times
in
636 Posts
I was sad to see in the news recently that Shawn Bradley, a wonderful human being, was paralyzed when hit from behind by a motorist just one block from his home.
This article points out studies that show how the media skews and mis-reports these events:
"... time after time, media outlets opt for simplistic, flawed framing that distorts public understanding by shifting blame, which in turn hurts the cycling community. It’s almost like they are avoiding facing what—or rather, who—is responsible for these terrible crashes. And that seems like no accident."
This article points out studies that show how the media skews and mis-reports these events:
"... time after time, media outlets opt for simplistic, flawed framing that distorts public understanding by shifting blame, which in turn hurts the cycling community. It’s almost like they are avoiding facing what—or rather, who—is responsible for these terrible crashes. And that seems like no accident."
Last edited by rydabent; 01-22-22 at 10:05 AM.
Likes For rydabent:
#20
Senior Member
Thread Starter
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Fargo ND
Posts: 962
Bikes: Time Scylon, Lynskey R350, Ritchey Breakaway, Ritchey Double Switchback, Lynskey Ridgeline, ICAN Fatbike
Liked 583 Times
in
332 Posts
First: the gory details can be found at https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ys/4802119001/
The short version is that Bradley was struck by the side of a moving vehicle which caused him to hit a stationary vehicle.
In a past life I was a firefighter and EMT in a very rural area with poor cellular service. I left that position in 2011 and those two factors may have greatly reduced the number of collisions I saw which were caused by vehicles operated while using a mobile device. I have personally provided medical care on scene for over 100 Vehicular Collisions. Note well that we never called them accidents. The dictionary I consulted states that an accident is "an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause." That does not describe most of the collisions where I have been on scene.
In my experience about 75% of VC incidents were attributable to DUII. Most were alcohol. A few were meth. I also saw a few where there was poly -pharma, mostly meth + something to bring the driver down. None were purely cannabis, and there was a fair amount of cannabis use in our district, In spite of the fact that this happened in St. George Utah it is not possible to rule that out without seeing the vehicle operator's blood alcohol and drug analysis. The description above makes that an unlikely cause, but still possible.
The next most frequent cause of vehicular collisions was adverse weather. The weather in St. George that day did not look too bad. It is possible that there was some ice or snow on the road but not likely. There had only been a trace amount of precipitation over the past three weeks and high temperature for the day was 50F. I doubt that this was adverse weather.
Third on my list was driver inattention. We actually had people just plain drive off the road because they were looking at the scenery. We had one driver hit a stopped school bus because they were fiddling with their vehicle's audio system. Yes, big, yellow, flashing red lights. Go figure! This is not a vision issue.
Beyond that I have seen at least three incidents which I might classify as accidents. Two drivers who became incapacitated due to cardiac arrest and one who became incapacitated due to a diabetic low blood sugar event. The vehicle which hit Bradley was not driven by someone who had such an event.
If I was investigating this incident I would be checking for drugs and / or alcohol, then checking cell phone records. I highly doubt that the driver of the vehicle which appears to have caused the collision to be accurate.
The short version is that Bradley was struck by the side of a moving vehicle which caused him to hit a stationary vehicle.
In a past life I was a firefighter and EMT in a very rural area with poor cellular service. I left that position in 2011 and those two factors may have greatly reduced the number of collisions I saw which were caused by vehicles operated while using a mobile device. I have personally provided medical care on scene for over 100 Vehicular Collisions. Note well that we never called them accidents. The dictionary I consulted states that an accident is "an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause." That does not describe most of the collisions where I have been on scene.
In my experience about 75% of VC incidents were attributable to DUII. Most were alcohol. A few were meth. I also saw a few where there was poly -pharma, mostly meth + something to bring the driver down. None were purely cannabis, and there was a fair amount of cannabis use in our district, In spite of the fact that this happened in St. George Utah it is not possible to rule that out without seeing the vehicle operator's blood alcohol and drug analysis. The description above makes that an unlikely cause, but still possible.
The next most frequent cause of vehicular collisions was adverse weather. The weather in St. George that day did not look too bad. It is possible that there was some ice or snow on the road but not likely. There had only been a trace amount of precipitation over the past three weeks and high temperature for the day was 50F. I doubt that this was adverse weather.
Third on my list was driver inattention. We actually had people just plain drive off the road because they were looking at the scenery. We had one driver hit a stopped school bus because they were fiddling with their vehicle's audio system. Yes, big, yellow, flashing red lights. Go figure! This is not a vision issue.
Beyond that I have seen at least three incidents which I might classify as accidents. Two drivers who became incapacitated due to cardiac arrest and one who became incapacitated due to a diabetic low blood sugar event. The vehicle which hit Bradley was not driven by someone who had such an event.
If I was investigating this incident I would be checking for drugs and / or alcohol, then checking cell phone records. I highly doubt that the driver of the vehicle which appears to have caused the collision to be accurate.
Last edited by DangerousDanR; 03-24-21 at 09:25 AM. Reason: correction
Likes For DangerousDanR:
#22
Senior Member
Likes For downhillmaster:
#23
Senior Member
In A&S, when in doubt, assume "details" that will blame the victim.
-mr. bill
#24
Senior Member
Bradley was struck from the rear according to bikinginla. It is far easier to avoid distracted drivers that you can see than the ones you can't. There is no word on who hit him and probably won't be. The reason the news and lawyers like the word accident is it makes it easy to get away with what should be attempted murder. The little bit of info on how our brain takes what the eye picks up and fills in the picture was to encourage others to study the facts. I did a search on motorists killing bicyclists while using the cell phone. Two came up that were both in California. Both collisions killed two men. The female driver that killed two bicyclists got off with no jail time. The female driver that killed one bicyclist and one motorcyclist got 7 years. She was texting. It is quite likely that the person who struck Bradley didn't see him. If this bothers you study the facts. This is no laughing matter.