Australia and New Zealand · Public discussion

Miranda Devine strikes again.

Started by geoffs · · Last activity · 39 posts · 3,534 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
Australia and New Zealand
Published
14 June 2006
Last activity
20 June 2006
Original author
geoffs
Posts
39
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,534
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 21–39 of 39
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. TimC said:

    On 2006-06-15, Shane Stanley (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

    Quoted message said:

    In article
    <[email hidden]>,

    TimC said:

    >She and her ilk should face facts. The road is not there to share. It
    >is for cars. Footpaths are for pedestrians. And bike paths are for
    >bikes, if there is any room left.

    That last parapraph is great.

    Comedy, almost.

    Somehow I don't think she caught the ultimate irony of her own words
    about there being no room left...

    I was thinking she intended it.

    You think she is that bright?

    Quoted message said:


    We all know Andrew Bolt can't possibly believe all the [censored] he writes.
    He's doing it just to be sensationalist, just to maximimise the
    agreement from his target audience, and get the most ratings. Someone
    I knew used to buy the Shun just to find out what [censored] Andrew was
    coming up with today.

    Yeah I tend to believe that. Its a shame tho. Not only is he a bright
    guy but sometimes he is spot on. And some of that is the unpopular in
    your face stuff, an And if he just stuck to that he would be
    sensationalist enough.

    I was going to put some examples here but then I would have to crosspost
    to Aus.politics

    Quoted message said:


    I can almost see in Miranda's writing that she doesn't believe
    everything she is saying, too. Some of it is just for a laugh.


    See here I disagree absolutely. She didnt intend that irony. Its too
    nice for a writer to waste. A writer would have to find a way to call
    it to your attention and she has just left it too subtle for the average
    reader 🙂

    Dave

  2. geoffs said:


    The SMH's answer to Piers Ackerman lets rip at cyclists again today in
    the SMH

    It would seem that the job is probably perfect for a psychopath. Read
    this and then reflect on the article again..

    http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/96/open_boss.html

    If you're dealing with a psychopath, their emotional response is so
    different from normal that you pretty much can't insult them. So
    sending in letters etc probably just feeds whatever drives them. Strange
    how so many people like this rise to the top of corporations. Or maybe
    not so strange..

    --
    ..dt

  3. dtmeister said:


    It would seem that the job is probably perfect for a psychopath. Read
    this and then reflect on the article again..

    http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/96/open_boss.html

    Not completely OT, this is essential viewing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation

  4. I disagreed with most of the points Miranda devine made. However, what
    annoyed me most was that I wasted time reading a column (it wasn't an
    "article" was it?) tha in the end wasn't very interesting.

    It is clearly written to be inflamatory, like the radio shock jocks, the aim
    is to provoke a response. Nothing more.

    Miranda Devine seems compelled to produce derivative claptrap utterly devoid
    of original ideas.

    Simply trolling the bottom of the barrel.

    Wilfred

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

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Shouldn't bother looking at this [censored] really - it is only written to
    evoke an angry response so she can feel all warm 'n fuzzy... Will look
    forward to undoubtedly some much more reasoned responses in tomorrow's
    paper.

    --
    eddiec

  5. [email hidden said:

    "]
    Dear Miranda,

    Please work harder. Your theme was excellent. Unfortunately, your
    exposition was confused and relied on special pleading. We expect
    more of our conservative pundits: excellent rhetoric; clarity of
    expression; and, the development of strong argument across the course
    of an article.

    Additionally you are factually incorrect about the purpose of the
    roads. yours,
    Sam R.

    Good one. Ignore the content as its not worth commenting on and criticise the method of delivery.
    Like shooting the piano, not the piano player. 😄

    Cheers

    Hugh

  6. HughMann said:

    Good one. Ignore the content as its not worth commenting on and criticise the method of delivery.
    Like shooting the piano, not the piano player. 😄

    As the original 'content' was obviously strawman bollox..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

  7. HughMann said:

    Good one. Ignore the content as its not worth commenting on and
    criticise the method of delivery.
    Like shooting the piano, not the piano player. 😄

    Thanks everyone for your kind words about my piece. I didn't get
    published though 🙁.

    Of course, I'm going to keep following this up after giving a
    reasonable time for a response.

    Next letter to the SMH, addressed to the Editors rather than the
    Letters page, around Wednesday next week, will of course have the end
    line

    "eagerly anticipating your full explanatory reply by post"

    and begin with

    "Please explain how you tolerate your paid commentators making errors
    of fact and then failing to print corrections when informed promptly of
    their errors of fact."

    yours with polite rage,
    Sam R.

  8. SMH letters:
    http://www.smh.com.au/letters/index.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2

    Koalas unfairly blamed for city's traffic chaos

    Miranda Devine is often fairly far off the mark, but her article lambasting pedestrians and cyclists ("Traffic hazard ahead: vegan cyclists", June 15) is beyond bizarre. Her claim that pedestrians are to blame for accidents at pedestrian crossings is, frankly, obscene in the aftermath of the Sophie Delezio accident. Her idea that cyclists increase traffic is illogical. How does reducing the number of cars on the road increase traffic? It is bizarre that the Herald would encourage this rubbish - discouraging healthy exercise, attacking a non-polluting transport mode, denying reductions in traffic and arguing against public transport.
    Martin Bocxe, Newtown

    Sydney, with very little rain and rolling terrain, is a great place to ride a bike, and today's gears get you up the big hills. Why else are the numbers of people riding a bike to work in inner areas increasing exponentially? Could it be that riding works better than driving your car?
    Carolyn New, Naremburn

    Build more roads, motorways, tollways and tunnels. Encourage more cars to compete for the available space. When the predictable gridlock ensues, blame the cyclists and pedestrians.
    Ian Sergeant, Kirrawee

    Miranda Devine, George Orwell would be proud of the high zest with which you have adopted Big Brother's (aka the Herald's) mindless mantra: "Four wheels good, two wheels baaaaaaaad. Four wheels good, two wheels baaaaaaaad." I guess someone has to keep car industry advertisers happy. Right, Miranda?
    Scott Ratcliff, Parramatta

    Miranda Devine's diatribe against vegans, cyclists, Canberrans, Greens, Labor, the RTA, koalas, buses, trains, light rail and Clover Moore was seriously deficient. She forgot to also denigrate unionists, commies, Asians, public education, feminists, whale lovers and poofs.
    Glenn Meeves, Kings Park

    Another hilarious article from Miranda Devine. I've never heard William Street referred to as a "beautiful six-lane road". I think she's been breathing too many exhaust fumes.
    Owen Pascoe, Bondi

    Miranda, April Fool's Day was two months ago. You had me going for a bit there though.
    Jason Purvis, Manly

    Amen, Miranda. Thanks for having the courage to say what needed to be said. Those of us in the Hills, with no trains, an appallingly poor bus service and a gridlocked M2 every peak-hour morning, can only hope that Morris Iemma is listening.
    Brian D. King, Bella Vista Waters

  9. Tamyka Bell said:

    This article is getting a bit of attention on coolrunning forums as well
    http://www.coolrunning.com.au/

    Love this photo in the Cool Running thread.

    http://flickr.com/photos/22133260@N00/168035897/

    DaveB

  10. cfsmtb said:

    As the original 'content' was obviously strawman bollox..
    en.wikipedia.orgStraw man


    yup...not worth feeding...

  11. rooman said:

    yup...not worth feeding...

    There's another process at work here. These sad media parrots actually do want to be seen as *legitimate journalists*. They *secretly* dream of Walkleys and Pulitzer prizes. I'll happily agree with others that we shouldn't give people like MD the time of day or any further publicity. But we should also have the right to hold 'em up to scrutiny and take the [censored] when it's appropriate. ie: Deny them the very credibility they *so* crave.

  12. Damn fine rebuttal to MD's nonsense.

    Onya Tanya!

    😉

    ******************************************
    Reaching breaking point. June 18, 2006
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/reaching-breaking-point/2006/06/17/1149964791318.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2

    It's war on our congested city streets and the growing number of bicycle riders have become fair game, Catharine Munro writes.

    'JUST yell out WAIT!," instructs Tanya Bosch to her class of would-be bicycle commuters.

    It's one of her tough lessons of survival in the jungle that is Sydney's roads. Courtesy is sometimes not an option, even if yelling at cars may earn cyclists their bad name among pedestrians and motorists.

    "I'm not even wondering if they are going to stop," Bosch continues, explaining what to do when drivers are oblivious to cyclists they are about to hit. "I just yell at them."

    It's an odd coincidence that Bosch (pictured) is teaching officers of the Roads and Traffic Authority, the builder of NSW thoroughfares and target of scathing criticism by motorists and cyclists alike over how it does its job.

    Last week 10 of its employees were learning skills for negotiating traffic on the roads that they also regulate. It's a program called Ride2Work, which is not funded by the RTA. Instead, City of Sydney council pays for large organisations to encourage cycling among its staff. Other participants have been Macquarie Bank and Lend Lease.

    Bosch is aware that some of the skills she teaches are aggressive, but she says that just to be a cyclist on Sydney's roads is to attract flak.

    "We have got a really bad reputation," she tells students.

    Bad? Try appalling. In the views of many other road users, cyclists hog lanes, flout rules and frighten pedestrians. To top it off, they are arrogant and self-righteous. When cyclists take off ahead of the green light in order to get a spot in front of cars, the indignation is often audible. One RTA participant is genuinely bewildered as to why people have a problem with her on the roads.

    Perhaps it's those couriers who whiz about the city, seemingly forever on the wrong side of the road, she wonders aloud. "Or maybe they don't want to put up with cyclists who get in the way."

    As for arrogance, Bosch's husband Eddie, a policeman and a keen road cyclist, points out that when the risk of being hit arises, cyclists can act out of fear.

    "Drivers would be swearing and carrying on if they thought they were going to be killed," he says. "We do get a fright when a car comes too close to us."

    Despite the near misses that all cyclists experience, some health experts argue that the belief that bike riding is dangerous is false because far more people die in car accidents.

    "People are overestimating the risks of injury and death by 10 times," says associate professor Chris Rissel, director of the health promotion unit at the Sydney South West Area Health Service.

    The RTA says that between 1994 and 2004, the greatest number of annual cycling fatalities was 23 in 1994. By contrast, 439 people were killed in cars in 1994. The margin between car and bike is even wider for injuries. While just over 1300 cyclists were injured in 1994, the figure was just under 20,000 for motorists.

    But bike accidents are a bit like shark attacks: they loom large in the public consciousness. Freak events such as the one in which an 18-year-old novice driver killed Australian cycling team member Amy Gillett in Germany last July are deeply etched in people's minds.

    MOST people like the idea of cycling. Cyclists don't burn fossil fuels and they keep themselves healthy. City of Sydney council boasts that when 26 of its participants rode a total of 8600 kilometres in a 12-week period, they avoided burning the equivalent of 1894 kilograms of greenhouse gases they would have generated if the had travelled the same distance in an average-size car.

    And we like riding bikes: in fact, bicycle sales outstrip those of cars by a healthy margin.

    More than 1.2 million bikes were sold in 2004, while motor vehicle sales totalled just over 950,000, federal body Austroads says in its National Cycling Strategy. But fear, combined with inadequate infrastructure, is stopping many from cycling, says Bicycle NSW's Alex Unwin.

    Last year a Victorian parliamentary inquiry into road rage found that cyclists were in the firing line because motorists were not aware of the rules governing bicycles. "The mere presence of bicycles on the road is often sufficient to precipitate acts of road violence, without the need for any additional incident," submitted one health academic.

    The warfare is only set to intensify as more people get on their bikes and fight for space on the city's congested roads.

    High petrol prices, traffic jams and a failing public transport system are inducing the change, proponents claim. European studies show that travelling up to eight kilometres by bike is only a few minutes slower than by car. The few official statistics that exist seem to support this statement.

    Figures supplied to The Sun-Herald by the RTA show that the numbers using the four main bike commuter routes in Sydney increased by an average of 19 per cent to 2460 last year. Participants in the annual Spring Cycle organised by Bicycle NSW increased from 4700 in 2000 to 7500 in 2005.

    The rise in cycling numbers comes despite the reputation of Sydney's streets as mean, where the drivers are hostile, the thoroughfares narrow and the weather too hot. The rest of the city's natives are supposed to be too scared to take all of that on.

    Sydneysiders do ride less than the residents of any other capital city, with only 1 per cent of the population riding every day. This compares with 4 per cent in Perth where there are more cyclists than any other city, the National Cycling Strategy report says.

    Nevertheless, bike riding is still on the rise. On the Anzac Bridge - a major arterial link between the CBD and Sydney's inner west - the bike route was used by 30 per cent more people last year than in 2004. The numbers of cyclists using the Iron Cove Bridge cycling track increased by 9 per cent, the same increase occurred on the Harbour Bridge and 28 per cent more bikes used the Anzac Parade cycleway.

    Those numbers do not include those who share the roads with motorists. Although some of those who are timid are getting organised. They are catching what's called a "bike bus".

    Every day of the working week, bicycle campaigner Fiona Campbell "conducts" the bus from Marrickville to the city and home again. Riding at the back, she calls out directions to a group of between four to eight cyclists. Another "bus" ferries commuters from Burwood to the city once a week.

    Her first stop is Marrickville's Henson Park Hotel at 6.58am and her last is the Archibald Fountain at Hyde Park at 7.30am.

    Many of her "passengers" are new cyclists who are finding their feet on Sydney's roads. "It's safer and it's also more fun and social," Campbell says.

    Employing the maxim of safety in numbers, groups travel a designated route each morning and evening. The bus is complete with a "conductor" and "driver", and travels according to a timetable.

    The growth in the number of cyclists would be even greater if the RTA built more bike paths, experts say.

    New projects such as the M7, which links Sydney's south-west and north-west suburbs, have bike lanes. "The next step is to complete all the links so that people can use it and get to it," says Unwin of the need for more cycleways.

    Yet even the NRMA has become impatient with bikes. While it may be legal for cyclists to occupy a whole lane, even two abreast, rather than stick close to the gutter, the respected motoring lobby group views the practice as "hogging" the road.

    "Cyclists shouldn't hang in the middle of the lane," says NRMA spokesman Nic Frankham.

    "They should share it sensibly and use cycle paths where possible."

    IT'S HARD to work out how the state will pay for dedicated bike paths. In the 2004-05 budget for NSW, the then roads minister Michael Costa slashed the allocation for bike paths from $15 million to $5 million and abolished the unit responsible for bike safety.

    Now that it's gone, pro-cyclists such as the Greens MP Lee Rhiannon find it impossible to work out just how much the state spends on bike safety because it's no longer a budget item. A spokesman for Roads Minister Eric Roozendaal said this year's bike budget had been increased to $7 million.

    The NSW Government has a policy of matching councils dollar-for-dollar for the bike paths they build. However, with only $5 million for the year to spend throughout the state, no one is taking this form of funding seriously any more. Instead, they are resorting to other funds to ensure bike paths are built.

    In the eastern suburbs, Woollahra Municipal Council uses the funds allocated for traffic safety to build bike paths. This is on the basis that bikes reduce the amount of motor vehicle traffic.

    One of its Greens councillors, Tanya Excell, compares NSW to Queensland, where the south-east of that state receives $10 million of bike paths each year.

    "We are just falling way behind," she says. "It's going to be harder and harder to drive a vehicle because of petrol costs and it's irresponsible because of climate change."

    Rissel says cycling has to be better for a commuter's health than driving. Three years ago he ran a study for his area service which recorded the weight of 6810 people and found that 49 per cent of them were overweight and that 69 per cent drove to work.

    "Driving to work was associated with being overweight or obese," he wrote then.

    He believes now that it's a "tragedy" the RTA isn't spending more on bike tracks."There's insufficient space on the road for cars and bicycles and people, and it simply needs to accommodate all means of travel, " he says.

    Five rules you should know

    * Bicycles are allowed in transit lanes that require cars to carry more than three passengers.

    * Cyclists are not allowed to overtake on the left side of a vehicle that is turning left.

    * A cyclist can ride beside only one other cyclist. Riding more than two abreast can attract a $44 fine.

    * A car must not drive in the bicycle lane, except in certain conditions.

    * Bicycles are allowed in bus lanes, tram lanes, transit lanes and truck lanes, but not "bus only" lanes.

  13. cfsmtb said:

    Damn fine rebuttal to MD's nonsense.

    Onya Tanya!

    😉

    ******************************************
    Reaching breaking point. June 18, 2006
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/reaching-breaking-point/2006/06/17/1149964791318.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2

    It's war on our congested city streets and the growing number of bicycle riders have become fair game, Catharine Munro writes.
    <snip excellent article>
    * Bicycles are allowed in bus lanes, tram lanes, transit lanes and truck lanes, but not "bus only" lanes.

    That's a glorious piece and puts some really important info out there, provided that those who need to actually read it. I think Nic Frankham needs a letter explaining just why cyclists "hang in the middle of the lane". though. Something to do when I get home...my shift just finished 😄

  14. On 2006-06-19, Resound (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

    Quoted message said:
    cfsmtb said:

    Reaching breaking point. June 18, 2006
    http://tinyurl.com/s7ag4


    ....

    Quoted message said:

    That's a glorious piece and puts some really important info out there,
    provided that those who need to actually read it. I think Nic Frankham
    needs a letter explaining just why cyclists "hang in the middle of the
    lane". though. Something to do when I get home...my shift just finished
    😄

    NMRA, RACV, et al., are full of tosspots (and I really objected to
    them using my name[1] in their propoganda campaigns on the several
    occasions I have paid them fees).

    Although I would not condone a bunch of 'bent riders to track them all
    down, line them up against a wall, and carve them up with front
    chainrings, oh nos!

    [1] "Our 2 million members really do not like these draconian
    penalties that punish feckheads who do wrong! Waaah!"

    --
    TimC
    When I'M trying to get somebody fired, I always walk a mile in their
    shoes first. That way, when I get them fired and they get all angry
    with me, I'm a mile away, and I'VE GOT THEIR SHOES! HAW HAW!
    --Beable van Polasm, alt.religion.kibology

  15. In aus.bicycle on Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:00:00 GMT

    TimC said:


    Although I would not condone a bunch of 'bent riders to track them all
    down, line them up against a wall, and carve them up with front
    chainrings, oh nos!

    But think of having to clean that much luser from twice as much chain....

    Zebee

  16. TimC said:

    NMRA, RACV, et al., are full of tosspots (and I really objected to
    them using my name[1] in their propoganda campaigns on the several
    occasions I have paid them fees).

    Correction to that Tim. RACV are less full of tosspots than NMRA. As least RACV have published positive articles on cycling, hinted at peak oil and have Bike Assist (for better or worse)

  17. On 2006-06-19, cfsmtb (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

    Quoted message said:


    TimC said:

    NMRA, RACV, et al., are full of tosspots (and I really objected to
    them using my name[1] in their propoganda campaigns on the several
    occasions I have paid them fees).

    Correction to that Tim. RACV are less full of tosspots than NMRA. As
    least RACV have published positive articles on cycling, hinted at peak
    oil and have Bike Assist (for better or worse)

    Whenever $1M is spent on bicycle lanes, they still want a "balanced"
    funding approach for cars as well. If only they knew what that would
    imply, perhaps they wouldn't.

    --
    TimC
    Disinformation is not as good as datinformation. -- unknown

  18. TimC said:

    Whenever $1M is spent on bicycle lanes, they still want a "balanced"
    funding approach for cars as well. If only they knew what that would
    imply, perhaps they wouldn't.

    Simple, spend $1M to get cyclists out of the way of drivers by
    installing bicycle lanes. That balanced enough?

  19. cfsmtb said:
    TimC said:

    NMRA, RACV, et al., are full of tosspots (and I really objected to
    them using my name[1] in their propoganda campaigns on the several
    occasions I have paid them fees).

    Correction to that Tim. RACV are less full of tosspots than NMRA. As
    least RACV have published positive articles on cycling, hinted at peak
    oil and have Bike Assist (for better or worse)

    The NRMA of a couple of years ago was very anti-car. It was captured by
    Talbot, Fraser, Singleton and turned into a middleclass left wing lobby
    group by exploiting opposition to the demutualisation and the fact that
    only a few thousand people bother to vote for the board.

    After a long battle and reform of the board the NRMA now is a lobby group
    that represents its members, drivers all across NSW. Expecting a motorists'
    lobby group to be procycling when its members are not is rather stupid.
    There are cycling lobby groups to represent cyclists.

    It's how governments and RTAs act that is important, and they are lobbied
    by both sides and supposed to act in the community interest. Carr, in NSW,
    still believes that all the transport problems in Sydney are just media
    being negative, with that attitude it is no wonder his government screwed
    everything up.

    dewatf.

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.