S.P.I.N. VS. C.M.: a media created conflict

As an advocate of Human Powered Transport, I am a bit appalled by media coverage which pits the Critical Mass rides against the Strength and Power In Numbers (S.P.I.N.) ride. It detracts from the issues both groups are trying to raise: Winnipeg needs better bike infrastructure! Focusing on the traffic infractions committed during these rides (infractions that we all witness committed by drivers, pedestrians and cyclists every day) shows our local media is biased and sensationalized.

For example, Critical Mass has been criticized for blocking entire roadways, running red lights, riding against traffic, and having participants who don’t wear helmets. Yet, Winnipeg’s mainstream media failed to criticize S.P.I.N. for doing exactly the same things.

Instead, we get articles like Tom Brodbeck’s "Pedalling poppycock: Contrary to vow, Critical Mass broke law" (Winnipeg Sun, Aug 28th, 2006) and Krista Boryskavich’s “Cyclists not only blatant law breakers (sic.)” with the caption “Cyclists, motorists, police see eye-to-eye for once” (Winnipeg Sun, Sept. 7th, 2006), and CTV’s inaccurate Sept. 6^th report on S.P.I.N. (they report cyclists stopped at red lights while their footage showed the opposite).

During the S.P.I.N. ride on Wellington Crescent I saw numerous riders cross over the yellow meridian and ride the wrong way down the street, yet observing police did not enforce this infraction upon The Highway Traffic Act. Entire lanes of traffic were blocked—especially on Portage—and some participants neglected to wear their helmets (look at the picture in The Winnipeg Free Press on Sept. 7th if you don’t believe me).

These articles focused mainly on the supposed ‘fight’ between Critical Mass riders and police as well as S.P.I.N. riders instead of the issue of bicycling. What a waste of publicity. As mentioned by S.P.I.N. organizer Lindsay Gauld at the outset of the S.P.I.N. ride ‘we are not anti-Critical Mass. We both want the same things’. In the end, the discussion of the hyped-up controversy between the two groups has been at the expense of discussing what society has to gain in terms of a healthier populace, decreased rates of pollution, and decreased government expenditures on roads and healthcare.

# posted by JRB @ 4:16 PM