Or how to report the story you want instead of the facts
On Monday, I reported on an alleged crackdown that APD was doing on cyclists who run stop signs. It had become quite the hot topic over the weekend on the forums at Bicycle Austin. Several cyclists chimed in on getting ticketed and the discussion of the forum, and my article became about not whether the tickets were deserved but whether it was the best way to achieve the goal of safer streets.
I say this again, the discussion was not about whether getting a ticket for running a stop sign was justified. In fact, the original poster who was ticketed recently made this statement:
Was the ticket justified? Yes, I understand that bicyclists are subject to the same laws as motorists. In fact I believe bicyclists should obey traffic laws, not only for safety reasons but also because it helps earn respect from motorists.
So, what was the story when the mainstream media of this town picked up on this? Cyclists are a lawless group flaunting their ability to break the law in broad daylight and get away with it.
That was the story produced by reporter Amy Johnston for KVUE yesterday. This was a bit of a surprise to me as Ms. Johnston called me about the story at around 2:30 on Monday. She asked me for the background on the story and my position based on my article. I explained my piece was in no way a defense of running stop signs or a critism of getting a ticket for breaking the law, but that the alleged APD policy’s purpose of making the streets safer was not being well achieved in this way and only served to further alienates the cycling community. I repeated that education through the organizations, leadership, and media outlets of our community in addition to citations (plus a look at what truly makes roads safe) was the best way of doing things.
Initially, Ms. Johnston asked me to do an on-camera interview. I told her I was finishing up some work but would check to see if I could get away. When I cleared my afternoon, I called her back about 2 minutes later to tell I was available at 4 PM. There was a sudden shift in the conversation where she indicated that that was too late, and they were no longer interested in talking to me. I finished the call saying I would remain available and that she was welcome to use any of my statements.
As you can see from the video of the KVUE story, none of what I said on the phone or online and none of what people in the forums were saying made it into the story. I would venture to guess our statements did not jive well with the already established story line. Instead of getting interviews from leaders in the cycling community, people involved in the discussion, City staff, or APD, Ms. Johnston and KVUE relied on the old FOX News, lazy journalist crutch: interview people on the street until you get someone who makes statements to support your story line bias, hopefully in a confrontational way.
This was not breaking news, people, and if KVUE actually cared about the story instead of inflaming people, they would have taken one extra day to interview more than the first few cyclists on the street they found.
Not only was this crap journalism, it was highly irresponsible. You see in the day to day interaction of cars and bikes, this matters. We are forced into shared space that isn’t particularly safe to share. Add to that the fact that most people would rather do just about anything than sit in traffic and the deep emotional irritation that causes, and we have the fertile ground for conflict. Instead of seeing cyclists as one less car they have to wait behind, the KVUE story perpetuates the confrontational us-against-them mentality that may lead to more violent ends. Stirring the pot of someone driving a 2 ton piece of steel isn’t a good idea and responsible reporters and editors would know better.
Instead, we will have to wait for this ticking time bomb to explode or quietly self-defuse. In the meantime, let’s hope we don’t have any more intrepid reporters tossing grenades haphazardly.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 12:34 am
[...] KVUE succeeds in its hit on the cycling community [...]
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 10:02 am
Thanks, Elliott. I appreciate your nuanced view on this.
On the bright side, this story appeared after the 2009 Austin Bicycle Plan was passed.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 10:27 am
To be fair, the nuance of “I think the law should be changed to permit what Idaho permits” versus “bikes should be allowed to run stop signs” probably isn’t ever going to be clear to people with no exposure to that law.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 10:49 am
Well I would say Eliott, its a 2 way street. I would say as long as cyclists don’t condone illegal actions of other cyclist , such as Critical mass illegal blocking traffic and others illegally tagging property around town to “promote cycling”, we will not get the respect we deserve. Does this site condone these illegal actions NO in fact it appears to be celebrated.
I, like M1EK I would like the Idaho stop as law here. But until then, it is illegal.
So my view is, until the majority of cyclists grow some values and stand up against the illegal actions of a few we will ALL be viewed as a “lawless group.”
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 11:17 am
Growsome_values (if that is your real name!),
I don’t think at any time did I say it was OK to break the law, but I guess you like KVUE feel it’s easier to take pot shots instead of offering real solutions.
BTW, why don’t you attach your name to the attacks you make? That would be growing some real values.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 7:30 am
I am no fan of Fox News and have been dissappointed 100% of the time when I have had the occasion to deal with the “news” media. However, you seem to be complaining that the reporter found the folks she wanted, instead of finding the folks you wanted to be on TV. The fact is that the most damaging footage is of the cyclists running the stop sign, not the idiots she interviewed. Yep, that’s right R-I-L-E-Y, you’re a real piece of work – Thanks a lot, J-E-R-K! There is the thread of denial that I see in the cycling blogosphere on the share the road debate: A very few irresponsible cyclists are poisoning the non-cycling population against the majority of law abiding cyclists. I wish there was some actual investigative journalism on this becasue from my experience this just isn’t the case – it’s bassackwards. It is the law abiding cyclists that are few and far between and the “it’s OK to ride like I want” crowd that is the vast majority. I wish it weren’t the case, and in fact, hope someone will prove me wrong with a valid study. Hopefully your posts will stike a chord in the cycling community that we need to be the change we’d like to see on the roads of Texas.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Kenneth,
My criticism was the inflammatory nature of the piece and the fact that there are dozens of cycling leaders, not just some guy on the street, that could have been interviewed to provide prospective on the situation. The follow-up story they ran on Tuesday was much more in line with that approach getting an on-camera quote from APD and me and providing quantitative measures of their taping of the Shoal Creek intersection (which actually supports your assumption that a majority break the law.)
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Elliott, I believe you’d see a similar ‘inflammatory’ piece if 97% of motorists failed to come to a complete stop at a 4-way, and >60% of them just blew through it at speed. In other words, the data led to the story, not the other way around.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
No Mike, the search for ratings drove the story, not the facts. Watch both the Monday story and the Tuesday story. One is made to boost rating and drive traffic to the KVUE website and the other attempted to educate the public about a real problem in a calm, rational way. I’ll let you guess which is which.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Are you implying that they didn’t have the data on Monday but went out and got it after the reaction to the story, just in time for Tuesday?
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
The report told me one of the things people asked about in response to Monday’s story was how many people they video taped on Shoal Creek total and what the percentage of people running the sign was. I think people were concerned things were taken out of context. They went back to look at the video for Tuesday’s story to show the actual data of the video survey. They had the ability to report Monday’s story one way if they wanted, and choose to go another direction. I think the article I wrote in response plus comments people made on KVUE’s site caused them to go back and do a new story. Tuesday’s story clearly showed there is a problem but in a less inflammatory, fact based way which I think better serves the public good.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
I did my undergraduate work in Broadcast Journalism, therefore I watch all news stories critically. Those who are saying that the story was irresponsible at best and inflammatory (potentially inspiring more violence against cyclists, something that is already a huge problem in Austin), are completely on the mark. The story was designed to get a bunch of old people, road-raged commuters and psuedo-rednecks into a hissy fit so that they would watch their broadcast and kvue.com would get a few thousand more hits than normal. It worked, and I’m concerned about the impact the story will have on bicycle safety. Showing that footage and then doing a single interview does not equal out to a balanced story in my opinion. But, that’s because the story wasn’t meant to be balanced, it was meant to be inflammatory for ratings purposes. As far as reporting goes, this was a easy and cheap stunt, and not responsible journalism.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Jordan, you’re right on the mark. One of the things we forget is that TV news is for the purpose of gaining viewers and selling commercials. Any story that will do that, is favored.
And what’s really behind the anger of the motorists? They wish they could do it too. They are driving machines that could get them where they want to go in about 3-5min, except for traffic lights, stop signs, and other drivers, and they’re so frustrated they can’t take it anymore, much less watch cyclists get a free pass.
If they made a video of cars doing similar things, it wouldn’t even be news. It would just be “police are worried about traffic conditions at X intersection…”.
Well, I guess we can expect a lot more honking, shouting and things being thrown at us if we’re lucky, and worse if we’re not.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 8:54 am
If they made a video of cars doing similar things, it wouldn’t even be news. It would just be “police are worried about traffic conditions at X intersection…”.
Dave, this is a load of crap. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I’ve seen a motorist just decide they’re tired of waiting at a red light and up and go through it (rather than the “running the orange” that both motorists and cyclists do).
Likewise, while most motorists roll stop signs (as do most cyclists); it is exceedingly rare to see a motorist go through a stop sign at anything more than a crawl.
First light I have to go through on my commute is 38th & Speedway. It’s a rare day when I’m there for a long cycle and don’t see a cyclist go through the red. I have never, in the 6 years I’ve lived here, seen a motorist do it.
The 95% of the population out there who doesn’t bike for transportation has eyes and a brain; and they saw this story – and they see cyclists flouting the law every single day.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 8:56 am
elliott, I disagree completely – I found the actual data in Tuesday’s story to be far more inflammatory (although, amazingly, “cyclists” are still ignoring it – you realize that these numbers were worse than any of us thought – and on a population of transportation and recreational cyclists – NOT a bunch of college kids?)
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 9:15 am
Well then Mike, you are different than the vast majority of humanity (as I’ve always known
). Most people react strongly to an individual person looking at you and saying it’s OK for them to break rules you yourself have to follow. Statistics on the other hand will never be as powerful as a person fulfilling your stereotypes. We are genetically ingrained to response to faces, not numbers.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Elliott, in general you’re right, but these numbers were so awful that it likely caused many other people, not just me, to think “holy crap, that’s even more than I thought”.
And once again, this wasn’t 38th/Speedway, with lots of students; this was Shoal Creek, with the cyclists that motorists think of as ‘real’ – brightly plumaged and helmeted on expensive bikes.