It's a catchy slogan right enough... Sometimes I wonder
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
give me cycle space advert
(74 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
"We have seen very positive results for the campaign in previous years..."
What taglines/mnemonics/slogans did they use in previous years? Hopefully the child-with-arms-out thing will be easy for drivers to remember and consider; that the picture also looks like a child riding with no hands or struggling for balance will hopefully not detract from it in the way that the kid from the safe driving campaign of a few years ago also looked a bit like a draught excluder in the scene were it was haunting its killer as he tried to sleep.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"The purpose of the campaign is to encourage more children to cycle to school. As the major barrier is parents' fear of busy roads"
This is so true. On Tuesday (yesterday) we all rode our bikes to school as Josie and I were helping out with Cycle training at school. Josie insisted our 5 yrs old ride on the path. When I questioned this, she said she is not comfortable and confident with him riding on the road with her alone. I can't ride to school every day with them. Josie said she was worried that when she next rode with him, he would insist on riding on the road, and she isn't confident with taking him on the road on her own.
I know people have their reservations about this, but its a step in the right direction, and if its the start of similar campaigns advocating safety for road users at greater risk, then I approve!
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Drivers! Don't run down children on bikes! It's rude!"
Yeah that would be a good slogan!
Posted 11 years ago # -
Drivers! Wait till they hit 16, then they are fair game!
Posted 11 years ago # -
From musing in another thread* it sounds like another possible example of where a convoy might make people feel safer? Do you know others living nearby who go to the same school with the same desire for cycling?
What I need to make is a google map showing everyone's commutes (and times). Those who overlap can get in touch with each other to organise convoys. Is this a bit too tricky?
Even better would be a smart-phone app/website that figures this out each day, dynamically... sounds like a fun project!!
* http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6334&page=2
Posted 11 years ago # -
That would be a great "social" riding app!
Advertise you're going for a ride, show your rough route, show your current location and speed thus giving an expected rendezvous point et viola you have some company on a longer ride or safety in numbers for an unfriendly area.
Tragically its so wide open for abuse it would never get used but it would be brilliant!
Posted 11 years ago # -
"I know people have their reservations about this, but its a step in the right direction, and if its the start of similar campaigns advocating safety for road users at greater risk, then I approve!"
I admire you optimism.
I'm not sure whether people here are thinking "no good", "not good enough", or "irrelevant/missing the bigger points" - or other.
As far as I am aware these are paid ads, so the whole thing is not cheap. Whether it's cost effective is next to impossible to measure. CS/SG obviously think that this is a sensible use of money and likely to have positive outcomes.
They might be right.
Key to 'future cycle safety' (aside from infrastructure/enforcement) is more people on bikes.
'Sustainable' thing is therefore to get more kids on bikes. BUT to do that effectively it needs more parents/carers to do that too.
Waiting 'til they are ten and giving them them a bit of training isn't enough.
Although guaranteed training for ALL P6/7s would be a start!
At what age children should move from pavement to road is up to the parents. I think it was about 5 with mine - but not on fast/heavily trafficked roads. Unaccompanied about 10 - but depends on roads and child's experience.
In isolation this latest video is really not great, combined with things like Edinburgh's current 'road safety' campaigns, POP etc. it might all add to a bigger/better picture.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Is this a bit too tricky?"
Yes, but...
Over the years there have been Walking Bus initiatives, and smaller numbers of Bike Buses.
It's all down to local organisation.
If you are talking about schools, just needs two or three parents willing to do the same route at the same time each day.
Others may get the idea and want to join in. Ultimately it might get to a stage where (say) 4 children are accompanied by 2 adults on a rota basis - but kids would have to be competent and willing to go with non-parents.
Ultimately you might get 20 or more riders taking over various routes to a school.
Posted 11 years ago # -
That would be a great "social" riding app!
There IS this -
http://www.rapha.cc/rapha-rendezvous
But not aimed at 'casual' riders.
Posted 11 years ago # -
There used to be https://bikebudi.liftshare.com
But it isn't loading so maybe it's car only now - https://liftshare.com
Posted 11 years ago # -
I think there's some overanalysis being done here... it's got the right sort of message, a good tone (I like cycling to school because people don't drive like berks)
I doubt motorists are thinking "oh, it's ok to drive closer to younger kids" - the ones who give it that much concious thought are above the 'rules' (whether they leave loads extra space or none at all).
It's the slumbering middle being targeted here.
Posted 11 years ago # -
But not aimed at 'casual' riders.
Or Android users.
Ach every time I think of an app there is always something similar enough to not bother!
Posted 11 years ago # -
"It's the slumbering middle being targeted here"
Probably, but will that make 'the difference' to -
"the ones who give it that much concious thought are above the 'rules' "
?
Posted 11 years ago # -
No, but that's a bit like that classic EEN moan about educating cyclists as to the meaning of red lights - everyone in the UK knows what they mean, cyclists more than most (since, on average, cyclists are more likely than 'most' people to have a driving licence).
In the same way, people who drive like complete [insert profanity of choice]'s aren't doing it because they just didn't realise it was scary or dangerous for a cyclist to get cut up. They know perfectly well already.
Posted 11 years ago # -
In the same way, people who drive like complete [insert profanity of choice]'s aren't doing it because they just didn't realise it was scary or dangerous for a cyclist to get cut up. They know perfectly well already.
Ah, if only it were so simple.
Yes, there are aggressive, "out of my way you ****ing cyclist" types, but there are also bumbling, incompetent, distracted, or medically unfit (eg. poor eyesight) drivers who don't realise what ****s they're being.
Dunno which is scarier, to be honest. The first type may use their car as a weapon, or get out and assault you for daring to challenge their supremacy. The second type will leave you maimed or dead in the gutter without even realising they've done anything.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"I think there's some overanalysis being done here... it's got the right sort of message, a good tone (I like cycling to school because people don't drive like berks)"
You could well be right. Spreading your arms out does not just denote the distance between your fingertips but also the biggest distance you can measure. It would be interesting to know what the "slumbering masses" actually think. Maybe it puts the concept of giving cyclists space into their concious where before there was no such thing.
Posted 11 years ago # -
actually, i watched it again and think i should take back my 'gutter' comment, it looks like they are to start, but the front on angle is clearer. but still think we need one for big people too.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Arrrgh! I have watched this video several times now and I hate it. Granted it has a nice tone, the wording is good. However, above people have said:
"At least it might make drivers think about the space they give to cyclists."
- to me it says 'give cyclists space, they need you to be an arms length away, no matter if it's a child riding along at 10 mph and you're passing them at 30+ mph. If it's an adult you don't need to be so considerate!
"Spreading your arms out does not just denote the distance between your fingertips but also the biggest distance you can measure."
- however, at the end of the video it says "give me this much room" and there are dotted lines vertically at the girls fingertips. Like some pishy cycle lane. (Also, and this may be a bit far-fetched, arms out to signify the biggest distance you can measure, would not be palm down).
""The purpose of the campaign is to encourage more children to cycle to school. As the major barrier is parents' fear of busy roads"
This is so true."
The major barrier to children cycling to school MAY be parental fear of busy roads, but not definitely and not even likely in my opinion. It is more likely to be true for primary children, but that does not seem to be where the major problem lies. It is secondary school pupils who scarcely cycle to school. Anyway I guess it doesn't matter if it is the major barrier or not, it is surely a barrier.
Please excuse me if this sounds aggressive at all or critical of posters above, it is not meant to be, I do find getting the tone difficult when typing. But as you may have gathered, I really don't like this video - especially when it was created by a cycling body. With friends like that...
Andrew
Posted 11 years ago # -
TBH I don't think it's half as bad as 90% of "official" road safety ads.
OK the stretched arms thing arguably gives the wrong impression, but when she says "do you know what I like best about cycling? Drivers who give me this much space" (at 24sec) it is illustrated by a car giving a decent amout of space to the line of bikes in a good secondary position.
Whatever was produced, we could argue all day about the detail, but if it gets some drivers to actually *think* about the space they give when they pass bikes then it's a winner.It's a glossy mainstream advert about cycling safety!! I would have expected "great, lets have more and cover adults/speed limits/smidsy's etc etc" but instead all we do is moan about whether it is good enough or not, twenty years ago it would never have been produced! Can't we be just a teeny bit positive for once?
Sometimes I think if the government offered us all new bikes for free we'd only complain that they were the wrong colour.... :-/
Posted 11 years ago # -
Aww Smudge you're making me feel bad now. You may well be right and I agree with you when you say, "Drivers who give me this much space (at 24sec) is illustrated by a car giving a decent amount of space to the line of bikes in a good secondary position". But each time I watched it I feared it would do more harm than good.
I spend a lot of time at work with people who make EEN commentators seem sympathetic, so I may show it to them and see what they think, i.e. does it encourage them to give more or less room/ suggest a distance with which to pass a cyclist.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I seem to remember a TV road safety advert from the late 70's or early eighties about giving cyclists space - with a kid on a Raleigh Chopper being passed too close by a van on a high street.
I can't find it online, but the National Archives have a great selection of old public information films:
http://nationalarchives.gov.uk/films/
Quite frankly, I'm amazed any of us are still alive...
Posted 11 years ago # -
"I spend a lot of time at work with people who make EEN commentators seem sympathetic, so I may show it to them and see what they think, i.e. does it encourage them to give more or less room/ suggest a distance with which to pass a cyclist."
That could be interesting/useful.
Posted 11 years ago # -
There should be no 'if' about whether it gets drivers to think. That has been researched. The research says it does work. Cycling Scotland's website says:
Results
The campaign has been piloted in several local authority areas, and has proven to be very effective in changing the attitudes of parents and drivers. The results of last year’s campaign showed that:
94% of people said the campaign made them slow down when driving in Cycle Friendly Zones
97% of people said the campaign made them more aware of children cycling to school
94.5% of people said the campaign made them give kids more space
79% of people said the campaign made them feel more confident about letting their children cycle to school
The campaign has also shown great results in encouraging more children to cycle, with levels of cycling increasing significantly across the participating 2010 schools in the primary 5 to 7 age group.
That should make it the first advertisement in the history of advertising that has been almost 100% effective. And yet, still only 3% of children cycle to school. How do we square that?
I don't know which to shake my head at first: that someone got paid for that research, that Cycling Scotland believed it enough to publish it or that neither the researchers nor Cycling Scotland seem to have heard of social desirability bias
Posted 11 years ago # -
What I dont understand is that no one is campaigning to have a variable distance based on the speed of the traffic. If I am passed on my bike by someone doing 20 or someone doing 60, I expect them to be slightly different distances away if I want to feel safe. I'm not sure the same thing applies to overtaking a car (or at least as much) because of the lack of wobble.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I guess they are focused on streets around schools where kids might be cycling (although they really should probably be walking - it's better for them) so 20 or 30mph areas.
Posted 11 years ago # -
OK, so they should be campaigning for the removal of setts and the creation of better road surfaces, traffic calmed in ways that dont affect cyclists.
My 8 year old has cycled to school all week but I wouldnt allow her to use the road yet because of the road state. That's for Gillespies; other schools have different issues.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Don't see what the confusion is over the advert?
You know when you are describing to someone how big an object is when the object isn't there, and you use your hands and say "it's this big" |__O__| or this big |____O____|. She is simply saying "I need this much space" |__________O__________| ie, impying she needs lots of space, simples!*excuse poor drawings, my imagination doesn't stretch very far!
**and yes I do realise that "lots of space" is subjective, but I think the general message is clear.Posted 11 years ago # -
I'd like it better if it also showed an overtaking manoeuvre from above in order to stress the point about not only leaving plenty of space whilst passing but also not cutting in too quickly once past.
It might cost more to make than a simple stop-frame film but I'd have done something depicting a child-cyclist in the middle of a large ellipsoidal CGI force-bubble which burns the paint of anything coming too close to it, with some sort of punchline comparing the relative ease of replacing burnt-off paint in the imaginary CGI scenario with the difficulty in restoring a squished child in reality.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Well I showed this video to an totally unscientific group of 15 16 year olds this am. Obviously none of whom drive or are learning to drive. I then asked them how much distance the video suggested you give the girl on her bike.
11 said an arms length
0 said from finger tip to finger tip
4 did not knowDespite not driving they were not short on opinions of cyclists; some of their comments were:
- "they are nippy"
- "they squeeze through cars and can scratch them"
- "they hold up traffic"
- "they don't pay road tax"
- "they should take the bus"
- "they shouldn't take up the roads"
- "they should ride on the pavement"
- "they should ride on cycle paths" - on futher questionong these are cyclepaths away 'somewhere else'
- " they have no insurance"Nothing we've not heard before, but quite an extensive list from children who don't drive! They couldn't have rattled off their times tables as easily.
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
