Clear Channel surrenders

=v= I know of earlier similar anti-bicyclist incidents at Clear Channel stations in Portland,
Oregon, and the San Francisco Bay Area.

=v= In the latter case, which I know best, the DJs said that motorcyclists should be doored, and
bicyclists should wear signs that say "[censored]" and be run over. Clear Channel was very quick to
apologize, and very lucky that the area's politically involved gay community didn't get after them
for this. (In fact I would say they contained the controversy pretty well. Notice that the
_San_Francisco_Chronicle_ story didn't even mention it!)

=v= They played some lackluster PSAs about bike safety and then "fired" the DJs, which meant they
were transferred to another Clear Channel station, where they pulled another stupid stunt and were
"fired" again, which again meant a transfer to another station.

=v= So, two lessons from this: (1) it's a bigger problem than just these three stations, and more
longstanding, and (2) their concessions don't seem to be all they're made out to be. Let's keep an
eye on them. <_Jym_>

(But what do you expect from an outfit that stages "populist" pro-oil-war rallies and overreports
their attendance?)

P.S.: Have you restocked your supply of FearChannel bumper stickers yet?

talkfastrideslow.orgstuff.htmlOpen ↗

Utter specious Barbara Streisand!!!!!!!!!!

My VW dealer sponsors the local flaming-clown suited racer-boy wannabes with the money they steal
from me with their exorbitant prices. An absolutely analogous situation. Fsuck VW & CCC

"Richard Adams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'll believe they've turned over a new leaf when they put up a three year sponsorship of a
professional cycling team. I read something that they did thes PSA's and did something else with
$30K, which is very, very lame and sheds some light on how big an impact they feel cyclists
really are.

Consider if they'd said blacks should all return to the cotton fields, how much more costly the
damage control would be. The cycling community could use a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton (albeit
less self-promoting) and aside from being a great athlete and promoting a cancer foundation,
Lance could be such a voice, if only Nike would throw their prodigious weight around and have him
do a few.

Jym Dyer said:

=v= I know of earlier similar anti-bicyclist incidents at Clear Channel stations in Portland,
Oregon, and the San Francisco Bay Area.

=v= In the latter case, which I know best, the DJs said that motorcyclists should be doored, and
bicyclists should wear signs that say "[censored]" and be run over. Clear Channel was very quick to
apologize, and very lucky that the area's politically involved gay community didn't get after
them for this. (In fact I would say they contained the controversy pretty well. Notice that the
_San_Francisco_Chronicle_ story didn't even mention it!)

=v= They played some lackluster PSAs about bike safety and then "fired" the DJs, which meant
they were transferred to another Clear Channel station, where they pulled another stupid stunt
and were "fired" again, which again meant a transfer to another station.

=v= So, two lessons from this: (1) it's a bigger problem than just these three stations, and
more longstanding, and (2) their concessions don't seem to be all they're made out to be. Let's
keep an eye on them. <_Jym_>

(But what do you expect from an outfit that stages "populist" pro-oil-war rallies and
overreports their attendance?)

P.S.: Have you restocked your supply of FearChannel bumper stickers yet?

talkfastrideslow.orgstuff.htmlOpen ↗

Richard Adams said:

I'll believe they've turned over a new leaf when they put up a three year sponsorship of a
professional cycling team.

What does that have to do with tolerance of transportational cycling, on regular roads, including
during rush hour?

Nobody that I know of opposes the sport of bike racing. But it has little to do with the routine use
of bikes in traffic, which many motorists do oppose.

Indeed, the more that bikes are looked at as sporting equipment rather than as transportation, the
worse off we are.

I looked for Forester's _Effective Cycling_ in bookstores for *years* before someone mentioned that
I could find it in the "sports" section. Sigh. Why do bookstores even have a transportation section?
After all, car racing, airplane racing, etc. are also sports. So why not put books on how to tune
your carburator or how to book a cheap flight there? It would make just as much sense.
--
Keith F. Lynch - [email hidden] - keithlynch.netkeithlynch.netOpen ↗ I always welcome replies to my e-mail,
postings, and web pages, but unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.

Keith F. Lynch said:

Richard Adams said:

I'll believe they've turned over a new leaf when they put up a three year sponsorship of a
professional cycling team.

What does that have to do with tolerance of transportational cycling, on regular roads, including
during rush hour?

Nobody that I know of opposes the sport of bike racing. But it has little to do with the routine
use of bikes in traffic, which many motorists do oppose.

To actually sponsor a team would be to state in the most sincere put-your-money-where-your-mouth-is
method that Clear Channel does not find those who ride bicycles only worthy of ridicule. It would
certainly raise their own visibility in conjunction with cycling, and consider how
counterproductive it would be for CC "DJ's" to promote cyclist abuse while the parent company is
actually promoting cycling.

I don't expect it to happen, as $30K is probably what the CEO spends on gas for his limo each year
and would be written off anyway.

Quoted message said:

Indeed, the more that bikes are looked at as sporting equipment rather than as transportation, the
worse off we are.

I looked for Forester's _Effective Cycling_ in bookstores for *years* before someone mentioned
that I could find it in the "sports" section. Sigh. Why do bookstores even have a transportation
section? After all, car racing, airplane racing, etc. are also sports. So why not put books on how
to tune your carburator or how to book a cheap flight there? It would make just as much sense.

All you really need to know about bicycling or motorcycling is, when you go out on the road, assume
everyone in a car or truck is trying to kill you. They may not be doing it intentionally, but
there's plenty distracted or otherwise skill-impaired, who would mow you down and probably bolt.

Richard Adams said:

To actually sponsor a team would be to state in the most sincere
put-your-money-where-your-mouth-is method that Clear Channel does not find those who ride bicycles
only worthy of ridicule.

The issue is *transportational* cycling. That someone supports professional bike racing on closed
tracks says nothing about whether they support what they may regard as "sporting equipment" being
used on regular roads during commuting hours.

Quoted message said:

It would certainly raise their own visibility in conjunction with cycling, and consider how
counterproductive it would be for CC "DJ's" to promote cyclist abuse while the parent company is
actually promoting cycling.

It would be perfectly consistent for them to take a stand of "get bikes off the roads and onto
trails and tracks where they belong".

Quoted message said:

All you really need to know about bicycling or motorcycling is, when you go out on the road,
assume everyone in a car or truck is trying to kill you.

If I really assumed that, I'd give up bicycling. If any substantial percentage of motorists really
were sociopathic killers who wished to kill all road cyclists, nobody would be able to bike a single
mile on the roads without being crippled or killed.
--
Keith F. Lynch - [email hidden] - keithlynch.netkeithlynch.netOpen ↗ I always welcome replies to my e-mail,
postings, and web pages, but unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.

Doug Huffman said:

Utter specious Barbara Streisand!!!!!!!!!!

My VW dealer sponsors the local flaming-clown suited racer-boy wannabes with the money they steal
from me with their exorbitant prices. An absolutely analogous situation. Fsuck VW & CCC

Honestly, did someone hit you over the head as a small child? If you don't like the dealership or
the brand sponsoring something, why do you go there?

If you actually did look at the amount of money VW puts into cycling sponsorship, you'd likely find
it's less than the cost of 1 prime time commercial. Saturn was more generous, but they've ended
their sponsorship. I think Subaru is still invovled, but most of their cycling related money is
going to Lance Armstrong for endorsements, enough, in fact to sponsor one heck of a team.

Keith F. Lynch said:

Richard Adams said:

To actually sponsor a team would be to state in the most sincere
put-your-money-where-your-mouth-is method that Clear Channel does not find those who ride bicycles
only worthy of ridicule.

The issue is *transportational* cycling. That someone supports professional bike racing on
closed tracks

Tracks? You mean Velodromes. Darn few of these left and fewer all the time.

Quoted message said:

says nothing about whether they support what they may regard as "sporting equipment" being used on
regular roads during commuting hours.

Races are typically held on public roads, but not during commuter hours. Every year a couple racers
die because drivers, even while a race or just large social/fund raising ride is publicized marked
with cones, etc, still manage to whack a couple.

A little background: Back when bicycles were the main source of transportation, pre WWII, bicycle
racing was in it's heyday. Anyone who resisted being passed by another cyclist felt it in their gut,
the competitive spirit. Now that the car is dominant, people empathize with auto racers, though many
don't bother to visit the track, but race out our city streets and public roads. The bicycle has
been marginalized. However, when Greg LeMond won the Tour de France, it proved a boon to cycling.
Now that Lance Armstrong is doing even better, cycling is doing very well. Where it will go after
Mr. Armstrong retires is easy to see, another lull, until the people are again inspired by heroes.
Getting involved in all positive aspects of cycling is good for all cycling. Sit on your ass and
complain about radio DJ's and you're accomplishing nothing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It would certainly raise their own visibility in conjunction with cycling, and consider how
counterproductive it would be for CC "DJ's" to promote cyclist abuse while the parent company is
actually promoting cycling.

It would be perfectly consistent for them to take a stand of "get bikes off the roads and onto
trails and tracks where they belong".

Cyclists in the two states I have lived have every right to the road as any motor vehicle, limited
access highways aside. A truly worthy cause would be cleaning up the wasteland that commercial radio
has become.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

All you really need to know about bicycling or motorcycling is, when you go out on the road,
assume everyone in a car or truck is trying to kill you.

If I really assumed that, I'd give up bicycling. If any substantial percentage of motorists really
were sociopathic killers who wished to kill all road cyclists, nobody would be able to bike a
single mile on the roads without being crippled or killed.

Yeah? Well they exist and I log ~200 miles a week anyway. On our group ride, Sunday we were
harrassed by a couple drivers who belive we all should go to hell or somewhere more appropriate for
cyclists. I'll be out there again, regardless.

"Keith F. Lynch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

The issue is *transportational* cycling. That someone supports professional bike racing on closed
tracks says nothing about whether they support what they may regard as "sporting equipment" being
used on regular roads during commuting hours.

On a related note, in the spring of 2003, Clear Channel Radio participated in the Cary, NC Cycling
Celebration that included ordinary road cycling and safety classes. This was the same group that had
a DJ make anti-cyclist comments this fall. When the station manager reminded me of this, it
supported his argument that Clear Channel has no agenda against cycling.

BTW, the Raleigh station has agreed to air 1,200 PSA segments on safe cycling and cyclists' right to
the road. The management has been working with me to agree on content and have been very
constructive. The message content is as follows:

The PSA language is as follows:

_G105___, The North Carolina Dept. of Transportation and the North Carolina Bicycle Club remind you
that bicycles are vehicles with the same rights, rules and responsibilities of other road users.
Whether you ride or drive, please share the road.

G105____, The North Carolina Dept. of Transportation and the North Carolina Bicycle Club remind
motorists to only pass a bicycle when it's safe to do so. Slow down and give cyclists three feet of
passing room. Whether you ride or drive, please share the road.

_G105___, The North Carolina Dept. of Transportation and the North Carolina Bicycle Club remind you
that bicycle riders have the same rights as motorists, so motorists should yield to bicycles like
any other vehicle. Never cut off bicyclists. Whether you ride or drive, please share the road!

_G105___, The North Carolina Dept. of Transportation and the North Carolina Bicycle Club remind both
cyclists and motorists to obey all traffic laws, stop signs, and traffic lights. Whether you ride
your bike or drive your car, please share the road!

__G105__, The North Carolina Dept. of Transportation and the North Carolina Bicycle Club remind
bicyclists that North Carolina law requires bicycles to have lights at night, and for safety's sake,
all cyclists should wear a helmet. Whether you ride or drive, please share the road!

[CCC, and the North Carolina Bicycle Club] remind you that state law requires bicyclists to travel
on the right half of the road in the same direction as other vehicles. Riding on the right is much
safer than the wrong side because other drivers don't expect wrong-way traffic. Whether you ride or
drive, please share the road!

[CCC and the North Carolina Bicycle Club] remind bicyclists to ride on the roadway instead of
sidewalks. Bicyclists who use sidewalks are actually more likely to have collisions with cars than
those who use the road and follow the road rules. Whether you ride or drive, please share the road!

[CCC and the North Carolina Bicycle Club] remind bicyclists to stay out of the door zone. Bicyclists
should ride at least four feet away from parked cars so they won't be trapped by the sudden opening
of a door. Whether you ride or drive, please share the road!

[CCC and the North Carolina Bicycle Club] remind motorists that it isn't always safe to pass a
bicyclist within the same lane. If the lane's too narrow or other conditions require a bicyclist
to use the full lane, motorists should change lanes to pass. Whether you ride or drive, please
share the road!

-Steve Goodridge VP, North Carolina Bicycle Club 2001-2003

On 17 Nov 2003 10:57:35 -0800, [email hidden] (Steven Goodridge) from

url='http://groups.google.com/'http://groups.google.com/url said:

BTW, the Raleigh station has agreed to air 1,200 PSA segments on safe cycling and cyclists' right
to the road. The management has been working with me to agree on content and have been very
constructive.

Thanks for your work. Do you think you could get a few PSAs distributed throughout the entire Clear
Channel system? That would rock! Not 1,200, obviously, but maybe one or two generic ones ...

--
real e-mail addy: kevansmith23 at yahoo dot com I'm having a BIG BANG THEORY!!

=v= Sadly, not one of these really explains the right and necessity to take the lane. <_Jym_

Jym Dyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

=v= Sadly, not one of these really explains the right and necessity to take the lane. <_Jym_>

You'll note that the first five PSAs include endorsement by the NCDOT. The last four do not. The
reason is that they were written separately, and NCDOT thought the last four were too assertive of
cyclists' right to claim a travel lane for their political comfort. They feared a backlash from
either the public or others within DOT and preferred to use much more passive language that in my
view watered down the message too much.

I've been trying to get the DOT to go on record supporting the right to use an entire lane when
required, but they aren't comfortable doing so even though the bike/ped division acknowledges this
is often important for safety.

Steve

Keith F. Lynch said:

Quoted message said:

All you really need to know about bicycling or motorcycling is, when you go out on the road,
assume everyone in a car or truck is trying to kill you.

If I really assumed that, I'd give up bicycling. If any substantial percentage of motorists really
were sociopathic killers who wished to kill all road cyclists, nobody would be able to bike a
single mile on the roads without being crippled or killed.

Not necessarily sociopathic killers, but stupid, inattentive, ill trained, on auto-pilot, dealing
with the kids fighting in the back, answering their cell-phone...