Turn ITV ON NOW !!!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
Bollo said:
Unfortunately short pop-current affairs programmes like this can only address an issue at the most superficial level. They're supported by researchers who will have little or no knowledge of the subject matter (today cyclists, tomorrow "what's in our bacon?"). The easiest thing to do is reach for the big book of cliches, in this case by choosing a programme title and format that emphasise the apparent conflict between road users.

The most dangerous aspect IMHO of these programmes is the illusory search for 'balance'. The blame, and certainly the consequences of incidents between cyclists and motorists are not in any way 'balanced'. We make a mistake or misbehave on the roads - we suffer. A driver makes a mistake or misbehaves on the road - we suffer. What's needed isn't balance, because it doesn't in any way reflect the imbalance in the figures or our experiences. We need a decent polemic made by someone who gives a sh1t.

Spot on, Bollo. In fact, I wish I'd written it!
 

Bollo

Failed Tech Bro
Location
Winch
theclaud said:
Spot on, Bollo. In fact, I wish I'd written it!

I am also available for children's parties.;)
 
wafflycat said:
It's part of the 'Tonight' series. It should be here ...

http://www.itv.com/ITVPlayer/Programmes/default.html?ViewType=1&Filter=1293

... but it's not at the time I write this. Perhaps it will appear later.

ITV say it will be available on ITV Catchup from 3.30am on monday, so I will be 'catching up' after work on monday. :rolleyes:

not a direct link, but http://www.123webtv.com/shows/tonight

Click the down arrow at the right side of
" Mon, 16 03:30 - Drivers in the Dock: Tonight " for the info.
 

jmaccyd

Well-Known Member
Bollo said:
I deliberately didn't watch this as such programmes usually have the same effect on me as appearances by the BNP and Christian Fundamentalists. It is not a good effect and gets very expensive on televisions.

Unfortunately short pop-current affairs programmes like this can only address an issue at the most superficial level. They're supported by researchers who will have little or no knowledge of the subject matter (today cyclists, tomorrow "what's in our bacon?"). The easiest thing to do is reach for the big book of cliches, in this case by choosing a programme title and format that emphasise the apparent conflict between road users.

The most dangerous aspect IMHO of these programmes is the illusory search for 'balance'. The blame, and certainly the consequences of incidents between cyclists and motorists are not in any way 'balanced'. We make a mistake or misbehave on the roads - we suffer. A driver makes a mistake or misbehaves on the road - we suffer. What's needed isn't balance, because it doesn't in any way reflect the imbalance in the figures or our experiences. We need a decent polemic made by someone who gives a sh1t.


Yes, so spot on it is hard to add to the spotoness of your arguement. I think you can throw into the mix the agenda of 'we are all at war with each other' that the media like to put foward in the name of good press.
 

mark i

Well-Known Member
I came in around 1/2 way through as Quentin was doing his unexpected cycle. The simulated accidents were attrocious in that they mostly did not explain what usually happens. i.e. as said before left hook is not usually an undertake, but an overtake that merges into a left turn in front of the hapless cyclist. The door open did not begin to explain to motorists in clear terms why cyclists cycle 4 -5 ft from car doors etc. Very superficial.
 

Cab

New Member
Location
Cambridge
That isn't how left hooks happen. Moronic, stupid, entirely set up to show that the cyclist is in the wrong.
 

Cab

New Member
Location
Cambridge
GAH! Its bright as day where the police are stopping cyclists without lights there in Cambridge. By all means catch cyclists without lights, but not specifically on the most well lit street in the city.
 
Top Bottom