UK and Europe · Public discussion

Does the Daily Mail hates Cyclists?

Started by Steve C · · Last activity · 156 posts · 6,680 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
16 June 2008
Last activity
24 June 2008
Original author
Steve C
Posts
156
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
6,680
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 156
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. A five year old was knocked over in Cheltenham and badly injured by a
    person on a bike. I first saw the story on the Daily Mail's web site -
    (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026806/Mother-tells-terrifying-moment-daughter-knocked-left-dead-cyclist.html)
    relevant bit to this post being "The female cyclist did not even stop".
    However on reading about the incident on Cheltenham's local paper's web
    site -
    (http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/latestnews/11-37pm-Police-appeal-girl-collides-cyclist/article-190248-detail/article.html)
    the article states "The cyclist involved has been interviewed by CID
    after remaining at the scene and contacting the police."

    My full symphathies towards the little girl and I hope she recovers soon
    but in terms of this post did the woman on the bike stay or did she
    cycle off? Each story paints completely different pictures of the
    incident and the comments in the Daily Mail are of the typical tax, fine
    and ban cyclists vein. Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    Steve C

  2. "Steve C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    My full symphathies towards the little girl and I hope she recovers soon
    but in terms of this post did the woman on the bike stay or did she cycle
    off? Each story paints completely different pictures of the incident and
    the comments in the Daily Mail are of the typical tax, fine and ban
    cyclists vein. Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has some (hidden)
    agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like this for some
    perverse reason?

    Steve C

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is the
    most telling:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down by a
    speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    pk

  3. PK said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either. What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
    is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
    scepticism. It's interesting to note that the text seems to have been
    changed since you quoted it.

    -dan

  4. Daniel Barlow said:
    PK said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either. What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    Well we don't know what the Daily Wail means by speeding. We don't know
    if it was a pavement with some magic white paint OR a pedestrian only
    pavement. After all this is the same paper that has the line "Officials
    believe that the area - near to the Taliban stronghold of Quetta in
    Pakistan - was turning dried cannabis leaves into heroin." in one of its
    stories.

    Quoted message said:

    Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
    is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
    scepticism.

    Indeed.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

  5. "Daniel Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    PK said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either. What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
    is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
    scepticism. It's interesting to note that the text seems to have been
    changed since you quoted it.

    -dan

    Not much of a change:

    "A girl of five was left with horrific head injuries after she was mown down
    by a cyclist on the pavement outside her home."

    The key issue, is whether the cyclist was on the pavement.

    pk

  6. "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Well we don't know what the Daily Wail means by speeding. We don't know
    if it was a pavement with some magic white paint OR a pedestrian only
    pavement

    I think the photograph of pavement, door and bollard in the article go some
    way to answering those:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026806/Mother-tells-terrifying-moment-daughter-knocked-left-dead-cyclist.html

    pk

  7. Daniel Barlow said:

    "PK" <[email hidden]> writes:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    Quoted message said:

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either.

    *Any* speed along the footway is excessive.

    Quoted message said:

    What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    *All* newspapers use whatever it is they choose to report in order to
    sell copies. They are businesses, and they all try to appeal to a
    particular demographic.

    However, unless this story was *front page* news, it would be hard to
    see how it had sold any more copies than if the story hadn't been reported.

    Was it on the front page? I don't know whether it was.

    Quoted message said:

    Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
    is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
    scepticism. It's interesting to note that the text seems to have been
    changed since you quoted it.

    On the "facts" as known and reported, it possible that both versions are
    correct and that the cyclist was apprehended by a passer-by whilst
    trying to escape.

  8. PK said:
    Daniel Barlow said:

    "PK" <[email hidden]> writes:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either. What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
    is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
    scepticism. It's interesting to note that the text seems to have been
    changed since you quoted it.

    Quoted message said:

    Not much of a change:

    Quoted message said:

    "A girl of five was left with horrific head injuries after she was mown
    down by a cyclist on the pavement outside her home."

    Quoted message said:

    The key issue, is whether the cyclist was on the pavement.

    It says she was. That doesn't sound like much of an "ishoo".

  9. PK said:

    "Daniel Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    PK said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either. What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
    is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
    scepticism. It's interesting to note that the text seems to have been
    changed since you quoted it.

    -dan

    Not much of a change:

    "A girl of five was left with horrific head injuries after she was mown
    down by a cyclist on the pavement outside her home."

    Quoted message said:

    The key issue, is whether the cyclist was on the pavement.

    Verbatim from the relevant website at 22:40 tonight (16/06/08):

    STARTQUOTE:
    "Mrs Kent said Millie had simply stepped on to the pavement while a
    workman was fixing the front door's buzzer before the cyclist crashed
    into her.

    As she fell, Millie is believed to have cracked her head on a metal
    bollard, fracturing her skull and causing massive internal bleeding
    around the brain.

    She was taken to Cheltenham General Hospital with life-threatening head
    injuries ... Surgeons struggled for four hours to stem blood loss in her
    head, before fitting metal plates to cover the open fractures in her
    skull. ...

    Gloucestershire Police said a woman cyclist was being questioned about
    the incident.

    No arrests have been made. Sergeant Steve Jones said: 'The girl's
    injuries are significant but improving. A cyclist has been traced.
    ENDQUOTE

    Perhaps she was local and was recognised.

  10. JNugent said:
    Daniel Barlow said:

    "PK" <[email hidden]> writes:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    the most telling:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    Quoted message said:

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either.

    *Any* speed along the footway is excessive.

    Indeed. Anyone cycling along this footway is incredibly foolish. I
    guestimate the width to be about 2feet.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    *All* newspapers use whatever it is they choose to report in order to
    sell copies. They are businesses, and they all try to appeal to a
    particular demographic.

    Indeed. I had the unfortunate experience of flicking through a copy of
    the daily mail at work the other day.
    The mails demography seems to be for people who like to moan about
    anything they can, and gossip about celebrities.

  11. Martin said:


    JNugent said:
    Daniel Barlow said:

    "PK" <[email hidden]> writes:

    Quoted message said:

    > Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
    > the most telling:

    Quoted message said:

    > "A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
    > by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

    Quoted message said:

    You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
    telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
    it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
    lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either.

    *Any* speed along the footway is excessive.

    Indeed. Anyone cycling along this footway is incredibly foolish. I
    guestimate the width to be about 2feet.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    What this tells me
    mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
    newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

    *All* newspapers use whatever it is they choose to report in order to
    sell copies. They are businesses, and they all try to appeal to a
    particular demographic.

    Indeed. I had the unfortunate experience of flicking through a copy of
    the daily mail at work the other day.
    The mails demography seems to be for people who like to moan about
    anything they can, and gossip about celebrities.

    That describes around 50% of the national dailies. As it happens, the
    Daily Mail is far from being the worst offender in either respect.

  12. Steve C <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4856af7f$0$80733$c5fe31e7
    @reader.usenet4all.se:

    Quoted message said:

    Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    I've just posted the text from "This is Gloucestershire" as a comment and
    expressed wonder as to whether The Mail is reporting accurately. I also
    wonder whether they'll post my comment on their website ...

  13. Geoff Lane said:

    Steve C <[email hidden]> wrote in news:4856af7f$0$80733$c5fe31e7
    @reader.usenet4all.se:

    Quoted message said:

    Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    I've just posted the text from "This is Gloucestershire" as a comment and
    expressed wonder as to whether The Mail is reporting accurately. I also
    wonder whether they'll post my comment on their website ...

    they won't.

    I know for a fact that several people reported this filth:

    The story:

    Pictured: Shocking moment drunk driver ploughs into group of
    cyclists.

    A cyclist was killed and 10 others were injured yesterday when a car
    ploughed into a bike race in Mexico.

    The terrified sportsmen were hurled high into the air as a 28-year-old
    driver, apparently drunk and asleep at the wheel, crashed into the
    race near the US-Mexico border.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1023813/Pictured-Shocking-moment-drunk-driver-ploughed-group-cyclists.html#comments

    And then the site moderators allow this comment:

    This clearly shows that cycling is dangerous and should be banned.
    Those bikes will have caused terrible damage to the car as well

    - Ken Hall, Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, 03/6/2008 09:33

    Beyond fxxxing belief.

    Many, many comments criticising this vile garbage did not appear on
    the website, despite that funny symbol next to it that means it's been
    flagged.

    I wonder if the cyclist in the OP could sue, seeing as The Mail lied
    about her leaving the scene...

  14. In article said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Well we don't know what the Daily Wail means by speeding. We don't know
    if it was a pavement with some magic white paint OR a pedestrian only
    pavement

    I think the photograph of pavement, door and bollard in the article go some
    way to answering those:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026806/Mother-tells-terrifying-moment-daughter-knocked-left-dead-cyclist.html

    If the cyclist was really on that very narrow pavement, why take a photo
    of the bollard in the road?

  15. "Alan Braggins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    In article said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Well we don't know what the Daily Wail means by speeding. We don't know
    if it was a pavement with some magic white paint OR a pedestrian only
    pavement

    I think the photograph of pavement, door and bollard in the article go
    some
    way to answering those:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026806/Mother-tells-terrifying-moment-daughter-knocked-left-dead-cyclist.html

    If the cyclist was really on that very narrow pavement, why take a photo
    of the bollard in the road?

    Maybe because that is the bollard the child's head hit after falling from
    the very narrow pavement after being hit by the cyclist?

    pk

  16. Steve C said:

    Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    The Daily Mail's agenda seems to be to frighten and outrage it's
    readers about everything, they don't just pick on cyclists.

    "The ideal Daily Mail story should leave you hating someone or
    something" - former Mail Journalist. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/aug/20/mydailyhell

  17. POHB said:
    Steve C said:

    Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    The Daily Mail's agenda seems to be to frighten and outrage it's
    readers about everything, they don't just pick on cyclists.

    "The ideal Daily Mail story should leave you hating someone or
    something" - former Mail Journalist.  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/aug/20/mydailyhell

    Luke Salkeld of The daily Mail is the reporter who lied about what
    happened, the This Is Gloucester website has the real story.

  18. POHB said:
    Steve C said:

    Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    The Daily Mail's agenda seems to be to frighten and outrage it's
    readers about everything, they don't just pick on cyclists.

    "The ideal Daily Mail story should leave you hating someone or
    something" - former Mail Journalist. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/aug/20/mydailyhell

    Looking at the photo I don't see enough room for a child and a workman
    fixing the doorbell to stand on the pavement. If the cyclist actually
    could have managed to hurtle along that pavement, she would have
    surely hit said workman too? Still, going fast in that road with
    bollards and a bend would seem to have been wrong.

  19. PK said:

    "Alan Braggins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    In article said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Well we don't know what the Daily Wail means by speeding.  We don't know
    > if it was a pavement with some magic white paint OR a pedestrian only
    > pavement

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I think the photograph of pavement, door and bollard in the article go
    some
    way to answering those:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026806/Mother-tells-terrifyi...

    Quoted message said:

    If the cyclist was really on that very narrow pavement, why take a photo
    of the bollard in the road?

    Maybe because that is the bollard the child's head hit after falling from
    the very narrow pavement after being hit by the cyclist?

    pk- Hide quoted text -

    - Show quoted text -

    Since the Daily Mail apparently is in error about the cyclist leaving
    the scene, I'm not inclined to believe them about the "pavement"
    either.

    Look at the photo. The row of bollards apparently closes that part of
    the road to motor traffic. I cannot see any reason for a cyclist to
    ride on that narrow, rough footway when they have a traffic-free road
    available. At the same time, the lack of motor traffic immediately
    outside their house is likely to make the occupants less careful about
    stepping into the road.

    Whatever, this report is far short of the circumspect "man was in
    collision with" manner of reporting the regrettably common ocurrence
    of cars running down pedestrians. In those reports "speeding" is never
    alledged in advance of the police report, even when it seems most
    likely that a legal speed limit was actually being broken, which
    cannot be the case here. Different journalistic standards clearly
    apply to reporting cycle accidents!

    I've never bought the Daily Mail in my life, and never will.

  20. On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:22:43 +0100, Steve C <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    A five year old was knocked over in Cheltenham and badly injured by a
    person on a bike. I first saw the story on the Daily Mail's web site -
    (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026806/Mother-tells-terrifying-moment-daughter-knocked-left-dead-cyclist.html)
    relevant bit to this post being "The female cyclist did not even stop".
    However on reading about the incident on Cheltenham's local paper's web
    site -
    (http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/latestnews/11-37pm-Police-appeal-girl-collides-cyclist/article-190248-detail/article.html)
    the article states "The cyclist involved has been interviewed by CID
    after remaining at the scene and contacting the police."

    When have newspapers ever let the truth get in the way of a "good"
    story?

    Quoted message said:

    My full symphathies towards the little girl and I hope she recovers soon
    but in terms of this post did the woman on the bike stay or did she
    cycle off? Each story paints completely different pictures of the
    incident and the comments in the Daily Mail are of the typical tax, fine
    and ban cyclists vein. Would it be possible that the Daily Mail has
    some (hidden) agenda against cyclists and are exploiting stories like
    this for some perverse reason?

    My full sympathy goes out to the little girl and her family too.

    I can't comment on the Daily Mail - I only know of it by reputation.

    I can comment on the Gloucestershire Echo and it is definitely of the
    ban, tax and fine brigade.

    I doubt we'll ever hear the full truth of this event, unless it goes
    to court.

    --
    (\__/) M.
    (='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
    ("😉_("😉 their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
    posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
    everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
    See http://improve-usenet.org

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.