My fifteen minutes

[magnatom]

Well done Bollo, you came over very well. Your accident looks utterly appalling, glad you are ok.


Magnatom, any idea when the Herald article is to appear?

No. It is going to be in the features section, so having a look at the electronic version of the paper I think that means it could be Friday (although I could be wrong).

The journalist who is writing it was thinking of buying her husband a helmet camera for his birthday, so hopefully she was on side!

 

[Rab]

No. It is going to be in the features section, so having a look at the electronic version of the paper I think that means it could be Friday (although I could be wrong).

QUOTE]


Cool, I'll keep an eye out for it, I get the Herald every day so will give you a heads up if i see it

 

[Sh4rkyBloke]

OMG - you weren't wearing a helmet when they first show you.... a sense a thread or seven being started about that!!

Well done Bollo, you did (as has been said) come across as normal, and it was interesting that they actually had the reporter get on a bike too, as well as showing some of his footage of being cut up in the short time he had a camera on.... that said, will it change the attitude of drivers? I suspect not.

 

[magnatom]

No. It is going to be in the features section, so having a look at the electronic version of the paper I think that means it could be Friday (although I could be wrong).

QUOTE]


Cool, I'll keep an eye out for it, I get the Herald every day so will give you a heads up if i see it

Just heard from the photographer that it should be going into the paper tomorrow (Nice of him to let me know!). Fingers crossed.

Anyway this is Bollo's thread!! Bollo, have you looked at the clip yet?

 

[PBancroft]

I've contacted Five to say what a good piece it was, and that it would be nice to have similar pro-cycling portions in the news in future.

 

[magnatom]

My only concern about the piece, which is in no way a reflection on you bollo, was that overall it was a bit negative. By that I mean it paints a biased picture of of dangerous cycling is. In fact cycling is a very safe activity and accidents like bollo's are the exception rather than the rule. Of course that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try and improve things, it just worries me a little that portraying cycling as dangerous is a little disingenuous and might scare others from cycling.

Some might say that my videos might scare others from cycling, although I do try to stress that these incidents are not life threatening and are a rare occurrence 3% of my commutes at last calculation!

Of course it might well be in actioncameras best interests to suggest that cycling is dangerous to help sell a few more helmet cameras....

We are also at the mercy of the reporters and the editors and how they want the piece to come across. I think my piece in STV, although it went well, was also a bit negative in the way it portrayed risk.

Anyway, Bollo, have you had any phone calls from the BBC, CNN etc yet? Are you too busy to chat on here now!

 

[gambatte]

Got to say, Action cameras may have shot themselves in the foot with the choice of camera they demonstrated in the feature.

Did look damn silly!!!

 

[Arch]

Well done bollo. Your piece on camera might have been short, but it was lucid and in recognisable english, which is more than can be said for a lot of public vox-pops - esp the drivers they then spoke to!

I also think it's good the reporter admitted some cyclists are bad - because he followed it straight away with 'and so are some motorists' and made the point that being cut up on a bike is more serious. It wasn't perfect, but unless a piece is filmed, reported, directed and edited by a real cyclist, it's never going to agree with us all (let's face it we often can't agree with each other!)...

 

[Mac66]

Brave thing wot u did. I'd cack my self in front of a camera. Well done you.

 

[Bollo]

My only concern about the piece, which is in no way a reflection on you bollo, was that overall it was a bit negative. By that I mean it paints a biased picture of of dangerous cycling is.

There were bits of the interview where I tried to stress how exceptional my incident was and I did have a stato moment where I dished out the likelihood of a serious accident per hr being about the same as driving and less than walking. I also bumbled on about people's perceptions of risk vs actual risk, increasing cycling numbers reducing risk etc (I'm an ex-physicist so I've always liked the numbers), but I knew even as I was saying all this that it wasn't going to make the final cut.

Turning the argument around, why the flip do we have cameras on our bikes? Its not to capture our lovely commutes (although my 'full' commute along 26 miles of Hampshire backroads is very, very pretty - more thatch than an '80s Ben Elton gig), but because there are times when we feel threatened, scared or pissed off. It's ok when when the filming is kept within the righteous brethren of cyclists because we also share and learn from our experiences. Expose this to non-cyclists and its very difficult to make any other argument. When journalists get involved, they want an angle and unfortunately the easiest story to tell is the one that reinforces the "general public's" perceptions.

I did think fairly hard about agreeing to the interview for exactly the reasons Mags has mentioned but decided that the accident footage maybe has a little shock value along the lines of the "think bike" campaign. There was also an element of devilment in that I don't think these things are taken seriously enough by the police and hoped that the journos might give them a call.

Anyway, Bollo, have you had any phone calls from the BBC, CNN etc yet? Are you too busy to chat on here now!

BBC, CNN?! Can't you tell that I'm writing for the Guardian now

 

[Jaded]

There were bits of the interview where I tried to stress how exceptional my incident was and I did have a stato moment where I dished out the likelihood of a serious accident per hr being about the same as driving and less than walking. I also bumbled on about people's perceptions of risk vs actual risk, increasing cycling numbers reducing risk etc (I'm an ex-physicist so I've always liked the numbers), but I knew even as I was saying all this that it wasn't going to make the final cut.

Turning the argument around, why the flip do we have cameras on our bikes? Its not to capture our lovely commutes (although my 'full' commute along 26 miles of Hampshire backroads is very, very pretty - more thatch than an '80s Ben Elton gig), but because there are times when we feel threatened, scared or pissed off. It's ok when when the filming is kept within the righteous brethren of cyclists because we also share and learn from our experiences. Expose this to non-cyclists and its very difficult to make any other argument. When journalists get involved, they want an angle and unfortunately the easiest story to tell is the one that reinforces the "general public's" perceptions.

I did think fairly hard about agreeing to the interview for exactly the reasons Mags has mentioned but decided that the accident footage maybe has a little shock value along the lines of the "think bike" campaign. There was also an element of devilment in that I don't think these things are taken seriously enough by the police and hoped that the journos might give them a call.



BBC, CNN?! Can't you tell that I'm writing for the Guardian now

It was brilliant.

There will have been loads of footage of the interview during which the reporter knew he wasn't going to use that bit, but it is all about giving them a bit they can use.

They found that some of your bits were very usable, else the story would have been ditched.

 

[magnatom]

Very well put bollo!

As I said before, I wasn't saying anything against you at all. I new you would have said a lot more than they finally put in the piece. Of course the story was more interesting if they focused on the incident rather than any other 'side issues' (in their eyes!).

Although I think the message was a little negative, I think the effect will be very positive. Drivers will start to think twice when they pass a cyclist, or cut in front of one. Does that cyclist have a camera? That in itself is a very good thing!! So bollo, you were absolutely right to do the interview. No question!

My interview could be viewed in the same light. Slightly negative. I was just lucky that they left the bit in about mutual respect on the roads.

Anyway it would appear that I have been bumped from the Herald today. Must have been something more interesting happening today . I'll post on here when it does finally make it to print.

 

[Origamist]

From C5s perspective this item had a good bit of “crash, bang, wallop “ footage and a gadget angle; cycling was of tertiary importance (or lower).

 

[CotterPin]

From C5s perspective this item had a good bit of “crash, bang, wallop “ footage and a gadget angle; cycling was of tertiary importance (or lower).

The item certainly ticked all the right boxes for a news item. I think it came across fairly well balanced - the reporter did mention bad cyclists but in the same breath talked about bad drivers. It also showed one of the reporter's incidents with another roaduser - that bus!

But well done, Bollo, for agreeing to do it and coming across as a very lucid, coherent and (above all) normal person.

Must feel weird though, reliving that experience over and over again??

Stephen

 

[Bollo]

From C5s perspective this item had a good bit of “crash, bang, wallop “ footage and a gadget angle; cycling was of tertiary importance (or lower).

There's certainly an element of this. C5 News is not exactly Panorama