[Closed] Victim blaming government video

[i]So the message is that when you get overtaken by a truck before it turns left you should hang back?[/i]

Good message.

No good been dead right...

So the message is that when you get overtaken by a truck before it turns left you should hang back?

Well I would.

So the message is that when you get overtaken by a truck before it turns left you should hang back?

Well yes, but how exactly are you supposed to do that, ESP?

I mean what this video is actually showing is:
a) a driver breaking the HC and driving dangerously
b) a truck design which is unsafe for the roads and would be banned by HSE if they actually regulated such things in the same way they regulate other workplaces

I agree with BR, but they could at least film a situation where the cyclist undertakes the truck at some lights where you could at least construe the cyclist being at fault, not just being left hooked.

'Hang Back' is the offending phrase - implies the opposite of what's happening in the clip. I suppose 'get the **** out of there by any means if some idiot trucker left hooks you' wouldn't fit, though.

But the tone of the whole thing - hilarious, innit? That must have been a fun creative meeting. Look at the things going splat! 🙄

Standard left-hook for those of us who cycle every day. Can't believe that they point of the video is to warn cyclists of riding up the inside of lorries when the lorry overtakes and cuts the cyclist up.

Rubbish video, it's really not clear what is saying and it appears to blame the cyclist for being overtaken.

After the DfT got a load of stick on Twitter from British Cycling, Cycling UK, Chris Boardman, the general public and even West Midlands police (something along the lines of "the only thing we'd use this for is showing HGV drivers what NOT to do") they released a video aimed at drivers.

But unlike this one, it's not a slick, professional looking video, it's someone driving around the roads around the DfT building in central London while the social media intern films from the back seat, then they've added some "don't run people over" tips over the footage. No dramatic music, no voiceover. Almost as if it was cobbled together in 30 minutes as a response to the sh%tstorm on Twitter!

http://beyondthekerb.org.uk/news/think-campaign-releases-new-film-to-deluge-of-critical-feedback/

Well crafted advert but yeah- doesn't make the distinction between putting yourself in harms' way and being a victim of dangerous driving, and it should.

Obviously it's better to react than to get run over. But there's 2 messages here and the other one is what non-cyclists take away. This says to truck drivers it's cyclists' job to stay out of their way.

I think you chaps should go back and watch the clip in[b] slow-motion - from 26secs.[/b]
It isn't a cyclist being left hooked - it's a cyclist undertaking a lorry before a junction. The lorry is in the middle as it's a one-way street.
A pretty bloody rare scenario in my experience, but maybe quite common in that there London where cyclists go faster than the traffic most of the time?
It is a crap video though - someone was having too much fun with their destruction clips production to show clearly what was happening.

The way to avoid being dead is to react defensively. It's not that tricky a concept.

DezB - Member

I think you chaps should go back and watch the clip in slow-motion - from 26secs.

I think if you have to watch it in slow motion it's failed. What counts is what people take away from it

I think you chaps should go back and watch the clip in slow-motion - from 26secs.

Fair comment but if thats whats needed to get the message across, the video has failed.

[i]it's failed[/i] =
[i]It is a crap video though - someone was having too much fun with their destruction clips production to show clearly what was happening.[/i]

Of course it's failed! You can only tell at that 27 second instant that the bike is going faster than the lorry. How it got released, I'll never know, it's utterly moronic.

looks like a simple enough message to me

it's not aimed at us remember... we're all pretty savvy
it's an educational video so it's aimed I assume, at kids and new riders

the message being watch out if riding up the left of traffic and be aware of vehicles signalling left

if you disengage your cynical, battle weary cyclist for a moment it looks pretty informative
most people on bikes aren't hyper analytical forumites

Dez sez:

It isn't a cyclist being left hooked - it's a cyclist undertaking a lorry before a junction. The lorry is in the middle as it's a one-way street.

But Bez sez:

First the rider is shown seemingly passing the lorry to its nearside. (Note that the lorry driver is not indicating to turn left, and is driving on the wrong side of the carriageway: the placement of the on-road “20” signage indicates that this is a two-way road. Edit: it is, it’s Monier Road in East London.)

Who's right? There's only one way to find out...
[img] [/img]

And the second clip of the lorry actually turning left looks much more like a classic left hook than a rider diving into a gap between lorry and kerb.

Its a stupid video, but its pretty clear the bike is going faster and undertaking the lorry.

[i]First the rider is shown seemingly passing the lorry to its nearside.[/i]

Of course - so THEN THE BLOODY LORRY CAN'T SEE HIM!

[i]lorry driver is not indicating to turn left[/i]

Cos normally everyone indicates!

[quote=slackboy ]Its a stupid video, but its pretty clear the bike is going faster and undertaking the lorry.

In which case, how come the cyclist is further back compared to the lorry in the second clip (where the lorry is just starting to turn) than it is in the first?

It has also already been pointed out, but this is a two way road, hence the only reason for the lorry being in that position on the road is to overtake
https://goo.gl/maps/eGRxzraK8ev

The point is that this looks nothing at all like the scenario it is purportedly trying to prevent and everything like a classic left hook. The only possible way for it to not look like that is if you do forensic analysis of the video to work out that the cyclist is going faster than the truck (there is at the best conflicting evidence for that) - but only us lot are going to do that, for everybody else all the available information is of a classic left hook.

All they'd have to do to demonstrate the scenario they want, is to show it more from the POV of the rider approaching the lorry at the back of a slow-moving queue of traffic and actually going for the filter at the moment the lorry sticks its indicators on. Perhaps with a wing mirror shot showing that the driver can't see you at that point.

Less time for cartoons though, sadly.

Jesus wept. It's a good job they didn't spend a shit load of taxpayers money before getting someone who doesn't have shit for brains to review their 'concept'. 🙄

[i]for everybody else all the available information is of a classic left hook.[/i]

Which, if the lorry is indicating, and you have time, you hit the brakes.
Unless you want to die. In either case, you don't need a crappy video to tell you how to get squished by a truck, or not get squished by a truck.

Bloody embarrassing all round for the THINK! campaign, which appears not not do that at all.

looks like a one way street in this scene. I imagine they shot the undertake and crash on different streets at different times.

[img] [/img]

[quote=slackboy ]looks like a one way street in this scene. I imagine they shot the undertake and crash on different streets at different times.

How so? Because that is a two way street. And no, it's clearly all shot on the same bit of street.

In either case, you don't need a crappy video to tell you how to get squished by a truck, or not get squished by a truck.

again Dez...

WE don't need a crappy video, but there were a few deaths recently in the city from exactly this scenario..

so SOMEONE needs to be taught... you lot are seriously overthinking this IMO

it's not aimed at veteran commuters as far as I can see

The position of the 20mph marking shows it to be 2-way for those who don't know where it is. My original reaction (which is the only one that really matters) was that this was a lorry in an overtaking position, perhaps starting to slow down as it approached the left turn, allowing the rider to move further up the inside.

but there were a few deaths recently in the city from exactly this scenario..

Do we know this for sure? I haven't seen any discussion on whether it was undertaking while a vehicle was indicating, or whether it was the classic left hook.

[quote=yunki ]WE don't need a crappy video, but there were a few deaths recently in the city from exactly this scenario..
so SOMEONE needs to be taught... you lot are seriously overthinking this IMO
it's not aimed at veteran commuters as far as I can see

In which case they should make a video showing the sort of scenario where the cyclist does something wrong, not one showing a classic left hook. In this instance it's the driver who needs to be taught.

You don't have to take my word for it:
https://twitter.com/Trafficwmp/status/780328106741665792

Someone has done a remix, without the "fun" crap. All becomes clear (as a shite filled puddle of shite)

Well, that's the furthest I've seen any vehicle drive from the nearside (the one on the left) kerb without having good reason. Urban traffic generally hugs the kerb to stop cycists getting past.

It seems worse from the remix. Assuming the lorry overtakes the cyclist, then slows down to turn left then surely it is the lorry driver who needs to exercise a duty of care? It's not even as if the cyclist is filtering which I think (assume) is the normal cause of these incidents.

The whole thing just seems to say, if a vehicle wants to turn left you (as a cyclist) should slow down and let them, they don't have to hang back and wait.

Classic victim blaming, but then it is the DfT...

Its not victim blaming - its advice on how to try and avoid being a victim.

The highway code has some basic tenets for all road users to help stop us coming into conflict. One is we drive on the left. Another is we pass on the right.

If you find yourself on the left of any vehicle (a truck is a worst example but its still [i]any[/i] vehicle) you're in a bad place and you want to take action to get out of that position. You're in just as much danger whether you've positioned yourself there through your own bad choices or because the driver has put you there by their own ill-judgement - the blame of the situation is irrelevant as to whether you recognise that its danger and get yourself out of it.

Live to phone the 0800 number on the back of the truck.

[b]Northwind - Member[/b]
DezB - Member
I think you chaps should go back and watch the clip in slow-motion - from 26secs.

[b]I think if you have to watch it in slow motion it's failed. What counts is what people take away from it

150% agree with Northwind on this

not sure it is victim blaming just a pretty crap video and pretty crap message combined to do a mega crap job

[quote=maccruiskeen ]Live to phone the 0800 number on the back of the truck.

What if you don't ever see the 0800 number on the back of the truck before it turns left into you?

Yes, it is victim blaming when the advice is to the VICTIM on what action to take to avoid being hit by a driver breaking the HC and the law.

f you find yourself on the left of any vehicle (a truck is a worst example but its still any vehicle) you're in a bad place and you want to take action to get out of that position.

I find myself on the left of a vehicle hundreds of times every ride. What are you suggesting I do to avoid that?

right..

i'm gonna say my last bit on this, cos there's some pretty entrenched positions here and this thread is probably gonna turn in to a dick fest

the fact is that there are drivers out there who were trained in less enlightened times and they are a danger to cyclists..
i like to think that alongside videos like this, more emphasis during driver training is being placed on increased driver vigilance
in a generation or so, this sort of poor driving could be eliminated from our roads

in the meantime, it's important to educate new cyclists that the danger exists.. too many new cyclists imagine that cycling enables them to scoot up the inside of vehicles without a care in the world.. we all see it every day

I would happily use this video to illustrate the dangers of that mindset to my children

useful video being minutely dissected and criticised on a renowned pedantry forum by people who already know better 🙄

Vehicles overtake me daily on the left, just as aracer says. It is not an inherently unsafe position, unless the overtaking vehicle decides to make a move that puts me in danger.

If this occurs then it is the vehicle driver that is at fault, not me. I am the (theoretical) victim, yet this video and some posters are putting the blame on me - ergo "victim blaming".

them to scoot up the inside of vehicles without a care in the world..

Except that isn't what happens in the video. Fair enough if it was slow moving traffic, or the lorry was indicating and it was obvious the cyclist was carrying out an unsafe undertake. The video didn't show this.

so what!!!?

the message is clear... be aware of vehicles on your right

The message is right, the video is poor. it APPEARS to show a left hook but it isnt, but the fact that is APPEARS to show a left hook until you watch it 2 or 3 times is a major booboo.

so what!!!?

the message is clear... be aware of vehicles on your right

The message to you may be, to me it is - "It's your fault if you get caught in this situation". It carries on reinforcing the vehicular hierarchy we have on the roads that allows the injustices we say daily.

[quote=yunki ]I would happily use this video to illustrate the dangers of that mindset to my children

useful video being minutely dissected and criticised on a renowned pedantry forum by people who already know better

...and the West Midlands Police, who like me would only use this video to educate drivers, not cyclists
https://twitter.com/Trafficwmp/status/780328106741665792
/p>

If you want to educate your children about the dangers of scooting up the left hand side of trucks, I suggest you find a video showing that rather than one showing the trucker doing a left hook.

[quote=yunki ]so what!!!?
the message is clear... be aware of vehicles on your right

I am aware of them (every one of the hundreds), the question is what am I supposed to do about it?

I wonder how many deaths have resulted from this scenario. I wonder how many have resulted from trucks pulling up to stop lines at traffic lights and crushing cyclists who were already there or who had legitimately filtered.
The fact it is being debated in the way it is being debated is not good.

Victim blaming - not sure.

Crap vid - yes.

However alongside lorries is NEVER a good place to be regardless of where it is or what you're riding/driving.

However alongside lorries is NEVER a good place to be regardless of where it is or what you're riding/driving.

It is very frustrating when on road cycle lanes encourage this too. Once again a failure of the DfT to standardise cycle infrastructure.

Victim blaming - not sure.

Crap vid - yes.

However alongside lorries is NEVER a good place to be regardless of where it is or what you're riding/driving.

[i]useful video being minutely dissected and criticised on a renowned pedantry forum by people who already know better[/i]

I've not heard Twitter referred to as a "forum" before...

It's a shit video yunki - the fact that it's message is lost in a war of pendantry makes it a shit video.

If you find yourself on the left of any vehicle (a truck is a worst example but its still any vehicle) you're in a bad place

But yeah I'll just echo the crap vid, tbh when I first watched it I thought the cyclists looked to be going a [i]little[/i] faster than the truck at 26s or whatever it was but then the rider was further behind in the next shot. Review and yes the cyclist was def faster in the first shot but the truck was in a daft position and not indicating, so doesn't look any more clear in it's objective

If they showed a vid of a cyclist riding up the inside of a truck indicating left near a junction and saying "please don't do this" that would have been fair enough - I'd be expecting it to be run in tandem with a similar advert reminding drivers of their obligation to mirror signal manoeuvre tho.

[i]dont be using these then eh?[/i]

A bicycle? Yeah, that seems like the most popular idea!

[quote=D0NK ]dont be using these then eh?

I'm amazed you managed to find a pic of a driver not completely cutting up cyclists in that "bike lane" - pic must be staged?

Also that bike lane passes a junction without diverting you to the far side of the moon and giving drivers at the junction priority. Therefore: fake.

As an aside - according to a knobber in my office, riding in the rush hour is "asking for trouble" and we should ride "when it's less busy". Yep, that's how supposedly intelligent people think. Shame I'm new here and had to keep me gob shut.

dont be using these then eh?

Use with care. I still don't go down the inside of trucks even when those things exist. Unless I know the truck isn't going anywhere.

But I agree that their existence invites possibly dangerous manoeuvres. I'm in favour of either full integration with some dedicated separate infrastructure. In other words, big proper cycleways where they're needed (coming into Cardiff from the East for example) but at other times, make cyclists part of traffic, don't sideline them.

Wise words Molgrips.

aracer - Member

the question is what am I supposed to do about it?

Well if I were you, I'd misconstrue the video in question, then absolve myself of any responsibility whilst putting myself in more danger because the other road user is at fault.
If I were you, because that is always your MO. 🙂

Peyote - Member

The message to you may be, to me it is - "It's your fault if you get caught in this situation".

That's odd, because the message to me was "Don't get caught between a lorry and a left turn".

The clue is in the video; it's the bit where that exact message appears on the screen. 😆

I still don't go down the inside of trucks even when those things exist.

+1

[quote=sbob ]Well if I were you, I'd misconstrue the video in question, then absolve myself of any responsibility whilst putting myself in more danger because the other road user is at fault.
If I were you, because that is always your MO.

Ah well, if I were you I'd take your quote out of context, completely miss the point and ignore all the valid points everybody is making

HTH

The clue is in the video; it's the bit where that exact message appears on the screen.

Very good. 😉

Ah well, if I were you I'd take your quote out of context

Taking the piss is not the same as taking out of context.
It's obvious what you should do, it even tells you in that handy video you posted.

completely miss the point

Pretty sure that the point is not to get crushed to death by a lorry at a junction. Not your paranoid fantasy that all other road users and the government are out to get you.

and ignore all the valid points everybody is making

😆

[quote=sbob ]Pretty sure that the point is not to get crushed to death by a lorry at a junction.

For which the best solution is a combination of getting the drivers to check the space they're turning into and removing trucks like those in the video from the roads (and replacing with ones where the driver can see the space they're turning into without all the trouble of checking in a mirror which appears to be too much for some drivers, like the one in the video). Sure education for cyclists comes somewhere down the list, but when they're wasting resources on shit videos like this, then clearly they're spending less time and money than they should be on stuff which is actually important. If they want to educate cyclists rather than just reinforce the motor vehicle hegemony then maybe they should produce a video showing the sort of situation where a cyclist is actually at fault.

Not your paranoid fantasy that all other road users and the government are out to get you.

Well now you're just strawmanning

the message to me was "Don't get caught between a lorry and a left turn".

The clue is in the video; it's the bit where that exact message appears on the screen

That is pretty good advice 🙂
But the fact that there is a video telling cyclists that trucks turning into them is dangerous, but no video telling truck drivers not to drive into cyclists arguably speaks to where the makers think the burden of responsibility for these accidents falls.

aracer - Member

For which the best solution is a combination of getting the drivers to check the space they're turning into and removing trucks like those in the video from the roads (and replacing with ones where the driver can see the space they're turning into without all the trouble of checking in a mirror which appears to be too much for some drivers, like the one in the video).

So the best solution involves the cyclist taking no action.
Quelle surprise!

Sure education for cyclists comes somewhere down the list

they should produce a video showing the sort of situation where a cyclist is actually at fault

Like a cyclist obviously trying to undertake a lorry approaching a junction?
Like in the video you posted?

I appreciate that your horrendous bias may prevent you from seeing what is actually happening in the video, but it is obvious to other posters, not just me.

Well now you're just strawmanning

Pointing out your prejudice is not a strawman. In ANY discussion about a cyclist and another road user, you'll side with the cyclist and discount any suggestion that the cyclist could have done anything differently to affect the situation irrespective of blame.

That is your form.

Like a cyclist obviously trying to undertake a lorry approaching a junction?
Like in the video you posted?

You watching the same video as the rest of us? It's a clear road, there doesn't appear to be any obstruction prior to the lorry carrying out it's overtaking move before swinging left. Standard left hook surely?

So the best solution involves the cyclist taking no action.

It's often the case when an vehicle overtakes another, make sure the way is clear. Particularly if you're going to be making a turn very shortly afterwards. All this irrespective of the vehicles types involved.

MrSalmon - Member

But the fact that there is a video telling cyclists that trucks turning into them is dangerous, but no video telling truck drivers not to drive into cyclists arguably speaks to where the makers think the burden of responsibility for these accidents falls.

Possibly, but that's not the exact message of the clip. We all know that actually crashing into something is a bad idea, this video is telling you to avoid getting into potentially conflicting space.

[quote=sbob ]So the best solution involves the cyclist taking no action.

Well what do you suggest the best action is for a cyclist to take to avoid being mown down by a truck overtaking and left hooking them? You seem to be so brainwashed by the motor vehicle hegemony (well apart from it apparently being a personal vendetta) that you can't even consider the idea that the best solution is to change the behaviour of those road users who are introducing the danger to the roads. Of course the best solution is to change the thing which is actually resulting in road deaths - the vast majority of cyclist deaths involve the cyclist doing nothing wrong (go check the recorded police stats, or what West Mids Police are saying), so even if you get all cyclists to ride perfectly you'll only get rid of a fraction of the deaths. Hence quite clearly the [b]best[/b] solution involves something other than getting cyclists to change their behaviour. Are you really so blinkered that you can't see that?

Like a cyclist obviously trying to undertake a lorry approaching a junction?
Like in the video you posted?
I appreciate that your horrendous bias may prevent you from seeing what is actually happening in the video, but it is obvious to other posters, not just me.

The vast majority of posters here seem to see it exactly the same way I do - oh and not just us, also major cycling organisations and the West Mids Police (who are a lot more enlightened than you). It's a very strange road position for the truck to take on a two way road for the cyclist to undertake it, and the cyclist is further back relative to the truck in the second clip than it is in the first. It's certainly nothing at all like the normal cyclist undertaking a lorry - in fact I'd go so far as to suggest there probably hasn't been a single death of a cyclist due to the cyclist undertaking a truck moving at speed on an otherwise traffic free road. The situation portrayed in that video would be laughable if it wasn't so serious.

Pointing out your prejudice is not a strawman. In ANY discussion about a cyclist and another road user, you'll side with the cyclist and discount any suggestion that the cyclist could have done anything differently to affect the situation irrespective of blame.
That is your form.

Well now you're just bare faced lying.

Though even if it did contain any element of truth it would still be an ad hom - where is my paranoid fantasy on this thread?

Use with care.

Peyote - Member

You watching the same video as the rest of us?

Yes, it's the one where the cyclist is obviously undertaking a lorry.

It's a clear road, there doesn't appear to be any obstruction prior to the lorry carrying out it's overtaking move

How can the lorry be overtaking when it is obviously travelling slower than the cyclist?

DezB gets it.

[quote=sbob ]Yes, it's the one where the cyclist is obviously undertaking a lorry.

The one where the lorry is on the right hand side of a two way road, despite no obvious reason to be there other than to overtake the cyclist? The one where the lorry has travelled further down the road than the cyclist in the second clip? Strange undertake.

The whole point is that they've created a situation which looks so like a lorry overtaking a cyclist that even if the cyclist is moving faster than the lorry in one of their clips it's far from obvious that it's a cyclist undertaking. I mean even if you do notice that in the half second it happens, then it could still be (and is far more likely given all the other available information about road position etc.) that the lorry has started to overtake and then started to slow down for the left turn.

How can the lorry be overtaking when it is obviously travelling slower than the cyclist?

Lorries have brakes right? It was braking to turn left after trying to overtake the cyclist. I can't see any other reason why it would be where it was without having attempted to overtake the cyclist then slowing down to turn left.

aracer - Member

Well what do you suggest the best action is for a cyclist to take to avoid being mown down by a truck overtaking

Different subject matter.
The video in question shows an undertaking cyclist. That's why the advice to "hang back" makes sense. 💡

Well now you're just bare faced lying.

I'll admit that there may have been situations discussed where you didn't blinkeredly side with the cyclist and discount any idea that the cyclist should have done anything differently irrespective of blame, I just haven't seen those threads.
Maybe they were before I joined. 😆

Anyway, to avoid any more confusion, kids: don't undertake lorries approaching junctions.
Stay safe.

kids: don't undertake lorries approaching junctions.
Stay safe.

that would definitely seem to be the message if taken on face value (unless maybe we're scrutinising the video with our own personal agenda)

The one where the lorry is on the right hand side of a two way road

Yep but lorries actually do that in real life to get around corners.

Sure education for cyclists comes somewhere down the list, but when they're wasting resources on shit videos like this, then clearly they're spending less time and money than they should be on stuff which is actually important.

Won't be from the same budgets as your other issues, so this point is pretty irrelevant.

Molgrips got it right about the video above. I think some of you are just trying to be outraged for the sake of it.

[quote=sbob ]The video in question shows an undertaking cyclist.

No, no it isn't. See lorry positioning, and lack of forward movement of cyclist relative to lorry between the clips. It doesn't show an undertaking cyclist in anything like the normal way cyclists undertake lorries.

I'll admit that there may have been situations discussed where you didn't blinkeredly side with the cyclist and discount any idea that the cyclist should have done anything differently irrespective of blame, I just haven't seen those threads.
Maybe they were before I joined.

I'll admit it's not totally shouting out "cyclist to blame", but at least implicitly accepting that some cyclists do things wrong which lead to them being killed:

[quote=aracer ]the vast majority of cyclist deaths involve the cyclist doing nothing wrong

from this post on this thread if you've not read that one:
http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/victim-blaming-government-video/page/2#post-7985472

Peyote - Member

Lorries have brakes right? It was braking to turn left after trying to overtake the cyclist. I can't see any other reason why it would be where it was without having attempted to overtake the cyclist then slowing down to turn left.

Heed DezB's advice.
Look at the clip @26secs.
The cyclist is travelling noticeably faster than the lorry.
The cyclist is undertaking.
"Hanging back" instead of undertaking a lorry approaching a junction is good advice and makes sense.

"Hanging back" from a vehicle that is behind you is poor advice and doesn't make sense, which is why this isn't represented in the video.

Come on people, this isn't difficult! 😀

Yes, it's the one where the cyclist is obviously undertaking a lorry.

don't undertake lorries approaching junctions

kids: don't undertake lorries approaching junctions.
Stay safe.

I'd rather they had just said that. Producing an ambiguous video that suggests something other than what was written seems at best pointless and at worst an attempt to push a different agenda completely.

Edited to add - What Donk said.

So the message is that when you get overtaken by a truck before it turns left you should hang back?

Seems like common sense to me.

Come on people, this isn't difficult!

A lot of people, not just here, think it is!

the message is not aimed at professionally outraged, traffic savvy cyclists FFS!!!

the people that it's aimed at are not for even a second gonna be analysing it to assess the precise maneuver that is being executed

the people that it's aimed at are gonna watch it and go 'ooh, ****ing hell!! I'm gonna pay a bit more attention around big trucks'

that is a very good thing