Online abuse has reached a “tragic level” and is dehumanising and endangering cyclists on the roads, British Cycling has warned, as the governing body says it will continue to use social media “to try and enforce better behaviour”.
British Cycling has, in recent years, campaigned against dehumanising language directed at cyclists, by both media outlets and the public, and more generally against toxic comments made on social media.
In 2019, Chris Boardman – in his role as policy advisor for the national governing body – responded to a Channel 5 documentary on cycling by pointing out that cyclists aren’t the “scourge of the streets” (a reference to the controversial programme’s title), but “mothers, fathers, grandparents and children”.
Last year, British Cycling joined a number of other leading sporting organisations and clubs in participating in a weekend-long social media boycott in protest against what it termed “the ongoing and sustained discriminatory abuse which sportspeople and others continue to receive online.”
> British Cycling joins sport's social media boycott this weekend
However, Nick Chamberlain, British Cycling’s policy manager, has told the Evening Standard that the culture of anti-cycling abuse online has not improved during the past decade and continues to put people’s lives in danger.
“Cyclists are worried that abuse online is going to be converted to dangerous [behaviour] on the road either verbally, or tragically physically where people have used a vehicle as a weapon,” Chamberlain said.
“It is just generally dehumanising language. Things have not got better. The abuse is still there. The language is as unpleasant now as it was ten years ago.”
> Driver rams cyclist and crushes bike during dispute
Chamberlain also noted that community and private Facebook groups – including those created to oppose active travel initiatives such as Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and cycling infrastructure – tend to be among the worst anti-cycling offenders, though the policy manager says that comments sections under news stories and call-in radio shows also provide a platform for abuse.
He added: “We just have reached a tragic level of abuse online and sadly cycling is caught up in it.
“It’s symptomatic of our busy, congested and unpleasant roads for a lot of people. This is especially around our big towns and cities.
“And then there are those who don’t cycle themselves or know anyone who cycles – when they see a cyclist going faster than they are in an urban area, we know that is a real triggering aspect for some people for some reason.”
Responding to whether another social media boycott is necessary to curtail these potentially dangerous levels of abuse, Chamberlain said: “We have to hold that up as a measure of last resort. Our preferred method is to be proactive, and we will continue to use social media to try and enforce better behaviour. We want to call these things out and talk about what we can all do.”
> Councillor leaked confidential security information during row over Low Traffic Neighbourhoods
Wandsworth councillor and active travel campaigner Jo Rigby, who says she was once “hounded off Twitter” by “awful, angry men”, told the Standard that the culture of abuse against cyclists is also fuelled by a “conspiracy theory” floating around that a “cycling lobby” is currently infiltrating government departments and stoking the so-called ‘war against motorists’.
“‘Cyclist’ has become such a term, with connotations of entitlement, when really I do not think it is such a them and us issue,” the councillor for Balham, south London, said. “I would say I was a resident who sometimes walks and sometimes rides a bike. It should not define someone’s entire identity.”
> Cyclists blast Mail on Sunday’s “manufactured” and “dehumanising” ‘red light rats’ story
The pervasive nature of online anti-cycling abuse – highlighted on road.cc’s live blog and collated on the Twitter page, ‘Stupid shit people say on Facebook about cycling’ – is also shockingly prevalent within the mainstream media.
In August, less than a week after Grant Shapps’ ill-fated pledge to introduce tougher laws for cyclists, the Mail on Sunday was heavily criticised for an article which claimed that 26 “rogue cyclists” jumped a red light outside Buckingham Palace in one 60-minute spell, prompting the paper to conclude: “No wonder cyclists face a crackdown”.
The article, published under the headline “Red light rats”, was described by cycling commentators as “dehumanising”, “irresponsible” and “dangerous”, with one cyclist arguing that the Mail’s apparent attempt to “stoke hatred” will “get people killed”.
> Road rage van driver who assaulted cyclist, knocking him unconscious, handed suspended sentence
Last month, a cyclist who was knocked unconscious during a vicious assault from a van driver noted the dangers of motorists “othering” and dehumanising cyclists on the roads.
“There is a big problem of ‘othering’ of cyclists, they are seen as less than human,” the 56-year-old, who was deliberately knocked off his bike by 30-year-old Jack Rawlins before being punched, said following the motorist’s sentencing.
“If something happens to someone’s car or something, it is seen as more important than the health and wellbeing of the cyclist, which I think is really worrying.
“Any kind of infraction of the Highway Code from cyclists is met with rage from people who may do plenty of things outside the Highway Code as well, but because it’s a cyclist they see that differently.”
Add new comment
29 comments
unfortunatley there is a lot of truth in this article. But we should also remember that most road users are courteous and considerate.
Yes.
Pedant warning: gross generalisations to follow!
We've had discussions before where we anecdotally estimate there are about 10% bad drivers and 1% malicious.
As most drivers in many areas pass few cyclists, they rarely meet cyclists so drivers gain little experience of how to interact. Cyclists are past by many cars a day so statistically they are highly likely to interact with the poor and malicious regularly.
“
Any kind of infraction of the Highway Code fromcyclists mere existence is met with rage from people who may do plenty of things outside the Highway Code as well, but because it’s a cyclist they see that differently.”Is this British Cyclings' bid for credibility following the Shell fiasco?
And the "Don't ride during the funeral" fiasco
And the "Yes you can ride, no you can't" Bridges fiasco.
well tbf their social media channels were on the receiving end of alot of abuse, the Shell stuff still going on obviously and targeted at riders too, fwiw.
It feels like there are two parts to that,on the hand targeted abuse at prominent sports people who use social media, for which the boycott was intended to highlight. And the general attitude towards every day cyclists you see across many platforms online.
I dont think you can put them all in a bucket called social media and treat them as the same thing
One of the least antagonistic comments on cycling mikey
"I’m afraid Mikey here antagonises drivers with his stupid actions on his bicycle. It was only last week I saw him doing a wheelie along the main road whilst slowing down traffic. He then turned on his go pro and pretended as nothing as happened."
I don't use Twitter at all, but I bet Mikey et al paid their 8 quid to Elon, like the hypocrites we know they are.
Does Mikey have a Ukraine flag on his profile now instead of his face mask and fully vaxxed status? It's sooo hard to keep up with the virtue signalling darling!
Agree with Martin about the sad cases following round minor celebs hoping for a pat on the head, mixed in with the continuous torrent of toxic comments...yet somehow half the commentators here have permanent bans from Twitter!
Too toxic for Twitter. Blimey, that's like being too racist for the KKK, good going guys!
Seeing as I have got a stock response sorted for M73 (which I am more than happy for others to use as appropriate i.e. for each of his posts) has anyone come across a similarly suitable one for Nigel?
Use the same one. It's probably the same guy anyway.
Obviously my name isn't Nige, but if it was your might consider using this as tribute
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Whatever you call yourself in this reincarnation, you will always be Nigel.
To be honest my image of you is more
This is peak irony. Rakia complaining of hypocrites and comparing people to racists, when only a few days ago, they were pretending to be a foreigner (but with comically poor English in some posts but perfect spelling and grammar in others) so that other people didn't realise they were a previously banned user.
Finally, we've found something you actually genuinely know something about, given that in your previous iteration you were banned for racism (amongst other things).
The whole War on Motorists thing is leading to a small but increasing number motorists being aggressive with not just cyclists but other road users, and this is not just in driving but also in heated exchanges where it becomes obvious that some drivers live in a world where they clearly believe that their perception of road use, often diametrically opposed to the principle of the HWC, is the correct one. Where are these ideas being fed from? Soshall meedya, I would suggest.
Only if they use social media, it's not as big as its proponents, who wanted to boost their ad revenues and stock options, make out. It's a bit like saying video games make people more violent.
Back in the day, before I deleted my account, I used FaceFiends to share useful information locally.
You soon find out too much about people you walk (and cycle) amongst. When you know the people who post the "cyclist deserved it" type posts then it's a bit hard to call them out when they've attracted a fistful of likes - probably from other people you know. Down the pub, you might have a chance of talking them round - in public they are going to lose face in front of too many people so they are going to twist and turn to save face, and the mates chime in.
Sounds great to me. You get to know who people really are and change your social circles.
I did and I have.
I think this is wider reflection of where society is right now, and I agree, social media and arguably the world wide web as a whole is firmly to blame.
The problem with having all this information at your fingertips, is that there is so much contradictory information to muddy the waters. Its unrealistic to expect someone to always take the time to read a variety of views, challenge those views, and your own perceptions, to come to a balanced, logical conclusion.
Instead, people simply resonate to viewpoints that match their own perceptions, further cementing their personal beliefs.
There is seemingly little care for facts and the truth, instead the value of a viewpoint is measured by how loudly its being shouted.
Really quite dangerous when you think about it.
Can concur - although not on Twitter, and not much on Facebook, got three very nasty punishment passes in the week following Grant Schapps' dog-whistle piece.
Back down to an average one a week now (I know, must get out and ride more) most of them forgot what he said or who he is. What people say on social, broadcast and print media has consequences.
But that's the thing the Grant Shapps bit was traditional print media, was it the Times or Telegraph or did they just end up printing the same piece a week apart.
Yes that seemed to result in a noticeable spike in abuse on the road, but it wasnt social media fuelled at all.
As I understand it. Things on old fashioned media make it onto the social media and is amplified.
See GB news...
but I dont, neither do alot of people, GB news average ratings are fairly low, they get disproportionately cited as being influential considering their audience market share.
and thats the point about social media, things might well get shared or amplified, but to whom exactly ? its not the you're sharing stuff with the whole planet platforms theyre made out to be, its generally just random people shouting into a black hole, having no influence whatsoever.
I'm having a lovely time with a couple of nasty pieces on Twitter right now
Why do expressions about the religion of the pope and the bowel habits of ursines come to mind...?