In the battle of who owns the roads, it would appear that cyclists and motorists are frequently at each others' throats. Friction between the two has skyrocketed according to media coverage in periodicals such as the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Seattle Post-Intelligencer. There are frequently stories covering current controversy at the monthly bike event, Critical Mass, or tales of bike v. car collisions that stem as a discussion point for safer biking roads and lanes throughout the country.
Such articles have created an ongoing argument not only on the streets of nearly every major city, but online on message boards where the bickering of who is to blame has taken form. Whenever there is a bike related article posted on an online newspaper site, an onslaught of comments follow. At times when users on the websites contribute personal safety tips for cyclists, or leave balanced comments defending motorists, the responses can be very helpful and informative. However, the majority of rhetoric between cyclists and motorists often quickly resorts to caustic squabbling of lopsided points of view and misinformation that generates an incredibly angry discussion.
Anyone who drives a car, rides a bike, or walks on the sidewalk is effected by this controversy because we as individuals can quickly find ourselves mixed into the argument. For a driver, all it takes is some cyclist cutting them off by running a stop sign and then flipping them the finger. For a bike rider, all it takes is a car pulling out of a driveway without looking both ways first. And for pedestrians, two words, collateral damage.
There is undoubtedly a lot of emotions involved in this topic because both groups feel so adamant about their stances and will argue with each other on blogs and miscellaneous forums to no end. Neither side wants to listen to the other, especially since the majority of arguments take the form of personal criticism against each other before any kind of productivity can take place, and in result discussions between cyclists and motorists are lacking.
About Me
- njkirschner
- I'm a student at Seattle University who plays pretend musician on the upright bass. Movies and comics clutter my apartment.
3 comments:
Good intro. You do an effective job of introducing your topic and summarizing the feelings of the different players.
Your thesis is clear (that there are conflicting opinions on this issue and that most of the time attempts at discussion just results in people yelling at eachother) and you also do a good job of giving your piece a clear audience. You make the point well that this affects everyone--drivers, bikers, and pedestrians.
I'm excited to read the rest of your paper, you intoduced it very well :)
Nick, your intro is direct and very accurate. I've often noted the bickering between bike commuters and drivers. (I even participate in such unproductive arguments with my roommate, who despises the fact I'm a bike commuter.)
Your thesis is clear. My only feedback would be to strive for some brevity, as some of your intro seems redundant.
You were objective. I'm glad you're exploring this issue with a level head from the middle of the road. As stated in your thesis, so much of the rhetoric around this issue is marked by people waiting to blow their tire at each other. The discourse is just a collision waiting to happen.
You made a good point to include pedestrians in the debate between bikes and vehicles. I think that this is important to the controversy and helps to keep it from being another two-sided debate.
You have a clear thesis and do a good job of not only reflecting on your resources but also on the comments that follow up articles, message boards, etc.
Post a Comment