BBC regurgitate BSHIT propaganda



D

David Hansen

Guest
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3557721.stm appears
to be a BSHIT press release that has been regurgitated.

People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.

>Formula One ace David Coulthard raced from the Malaysian
>Grand Prix to back a campaign to make helmets compulsory
>for young cyclists.
>
>The motor racing star, who came sixth in Sunday's race for
>McLaren, said he hoped children would be encouraged to don
>a helmet by the fact he wears one.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number
F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK
government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
 
"David Hansen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3557721.stm appears
> to be a BSHIT press release that has been regurgitated.
>
> People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.
>
> >Formula One ace David Coulthard raced from the Malaysian
> >Grand Prix to back a campaign to make helmets compulsory
> >for young cyclists.
> >
> >The motor racing star, who came sixth in Sunday's race
> >for McLaren, said he hoped children would be encouraged
> >to don a helmet by the fact he wears one.

So, he'd drive an experimental and unreliable car at 200mph,
but not pop to the shop on a bike. I notice in there it says
that Jason Queally supports this nonesense.

(from another thread) helmets make you safe ...
http://www.hansrey.com/HR048.jpg
 
David Hansen wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3557721.stm appears
> to be a BSHIT press release that has been regurgitated.
>=20
> People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.
>=20
>> Formula One ace David Coulthard raced from the Malaysian
>> Grand Prix to back a campaign to make helmets compulsory
>> for young cyclists.
>>=20
>> The motor racing star, who came sixth in Sunday's race
>> for McLaren, said he hoped children would be encouraged
>> to don a helmet by the fact he wears one.

"I wouldn't go on my bike without a helmet".....=20

<cynic> Nothing to do with F1 insurance etc, of
course...... </cynic>

--=20 cupra (remove nospam please to mail)
 
" cupra" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

"I wouldn't go on my bike without a helmet".....
<cynic> Nothing to do with F1 insurance etc, of
course...... </cynic>

And clearly nothing to do with Coulthard's financial
interest in a helmet maker either. How could you suggest
such a thing?

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> " cupra" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> berlin.de...
>=20
> "I wouldn't go on my bike without a helmet"..... <cynic>
> Nothing to do with F1 insurance etc, of course......
> </cynic>
>=20
> And clearly nothing to do with Coulthard's financial
> interest in a helmet maker either. How could you suggest
> such a thing?

I know.... shame on me!

--=20 cupra (remove nospam please to mail)
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> >The motor racing star, who came sixth in Sunday's race
> >for McLaren, said he hoped children would be encouraged
> >to don a helmet by the fact he wears one.
>
One that he has copyrighted the saltaire on!
 
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:16:47 +0000 (UTC), "W K" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>So, he'd drive an experimental and unreliable car at
>200mph ...

He already does.

James
 
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:09:51 +0000, David Hansen
<[email protected]> wrote:

>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3557721.stm appears
>to be a BSHIT press release that has been regurgitated.
>
>People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.

It seems to be very well-balanced already.

The reports opens by explaining DC's aims, it goes on to
say something about the bill. It quotes a few statistics.
It continues by explaining some of the problems involved
in getting youngsters to wear helmets. It talks of some of
the possible consequences of not protecting the head.
After a few more statistics, it explains the view of the
National Cycling Strategy Board, which is that compulsion
may deter cyclists and the possible consequences in terms
of poor health.

The two highlighted quotes are:

"It's as sensible as putting your seat belt on when you get
into a car."

and,

"It would dramatically reduce the number of cyclists and be
the worst possible step to take when we are also concerned
about the desperate health problems arising from obesity."

Which nicely balance the argument.
 
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:43:34 +0000 someone who may be Gonzalez
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>>People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.
>
>It seems to be very well-balanced already. [snip] Which
>nicely balance the argument.

Which was not there in the original story. They have
obviously been lobbied by people and changed the story
quite dramatically from the original regurgitation of
BSHIT propaganda. Several paragraphs are new, as are some
of the links.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number
F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK
government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
 
Not that I know exactly what happened and not that I wish to critisise a mother who has had a devastating loss, but I notice that she says:

"A cycle helmet would have made every difference because he just got a small knock on the face - even the doctors didn't think there was anything wrong initially," said Ms Annetts.

"Unfortunately his brain started swelling and he ended up brain dead."


Now, sorry, but can someone explain to me how the cycle helmet worn by Mr Coultart is going to prevent someone getting a small knock on the face? To me this contributes to the anti compulsion line: many people seem to think that a helmet is going to make a cyclist invincible. It doesn't.
 
"robbiew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Not that I know exactly what happened and not that I wish
> to critisise a
mother who has had a devastating loss, but I notice
that she says:
>
> "A cycle helmet would have made every difference because
> he just got a small knock on the face - even the doctors
> didn't think there was anything wrong initially," said Ms
> Annetts.
>
> "Unfortunately his brain started swelling and he ended up
> brain dead."
>
>
> Now, sorry, but can someone explain to me how the cycle
> helmet worn by Mr Coultart is going to prevent someone
> getting a small knock on the face?

Isn't the one he's trying to SELL a full face one?
 
"W K" <[email protected]>typed

> "robbiew" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Not that I know exactly what happened and not that I
> > wish to critisise a
> mother who has had a devastating loss, but I notice that
> she says:
> >
> > "A cycle helmet would have made every difference because
> > he just got a small knock on the face - even the doctors
> > didn't think there was anything wrong initially," said
> > Ms Annetts.
> >
> > "Unfortunately his brain started swelling and he ended
> > up brain dead."
> >
> >
> > Now, sorry, but can someone explain to me how the cycle
> > helmet worn by Mr Coultart is going to prevent someone
> > getting a small knock on the face?

> Isn't the one he's trying to SELL a full face one?

Isn't this the kind of injury that is MORE likely when
wearing a h*lm*t?

(Or is my understanding of diffuse brain injury/ cerebral
oedema totally useless?...)

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email protected] Edgware.
 
"burt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "David Hansen" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:eek:[email protected]...
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3557721.stm
> > appears to be a BSHIT press release that has been
> > regurgitated.
> >
> > People might like to ask the BBC to provide some
> > balance.
> >
> If you want to respond, click on the Feedback button on
> the top right.
Cut
> and paste the url address of the news item.

And then watch your ability to post to the Talkback forums
(should you wish to do this) disappear like thin spit on a
hot stove - I pointed out that they had "United Kingdom"
when they meant "England" in an article (no reply, but as
here, the article miraculously changed) - I used to be a
fairly regular correspondent on their forums, but since
then, I've obviously had nothing interesting to say }:).

E
 
David Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:43:34 +0000 someone who may be
> Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>>People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.
>>
>>It seems to be very well-balanced already. [snip] Which
>>nicely balance the argument.
>
> Which was not there in the original story. They have
> obviously been lobbied by people and changed the story
> quite dramatically from the original regurgitation of
> BSHIT propaganda. Several paragraphs are new, as are some
> of the links.
>

BBC Newsround (for children) on web and Ceefax, regurgitates
the usual rubbish, and says nothing about helmets not
providing the claimed benefits. There's a vote which allows
you to vote against compulsion only on the grounds that it
would reduce cycling. It's at: <http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/c-
bbcnews/hi/vote/votes/newsid_3565000/3565727.stm?dynamic_vo-
te=ON#vote_3565727>

Pro-choice is losing at present - please vote.

Colin McKenzie
 
"Colin McKenzie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:BAm8c.26447$Y%[email protected]...
> David Hansen wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:43:34 +0000 someone who may be
> > Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
> BBC Newsround (for children) on web and Ceefax,
> regurgitates the usual rubbish, and says nothing about
> helmets not providing the claimed benefits. There's a vote
> which allows you to vote against compulsion only on the
> grounds that it would reduce cycling. It's at:
>
<http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/vote/votes/newsid_35-
65000/3565727.stm ?dynamic_vote=ON#vote_3565727>
>
> Pro-choice is losing at present - please vote.

The page is there, but when you try to vote, you get the
message "page not found" Perhaps too many people were voting
against helmets?!
>
> Colin McKenzie
 
burt wrote:
>
<http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/vote/votes/newsid_35-
65000/3565727 .stm ?dynamic_vote=ON#vote_3565727>
> >
> > Pro-choice is losing at present - please vote.
>
> The page is there, but when you try to vote, you get the
> message "page not found" Perhaps too many people were
> voting against helmets?!

It works for me in IE6, but not in Opera.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/
Why I like OE6 - http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/misc/oe6.html
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
 
Danny Colyer wrote:
> It works for me in IE6, but not in Opera.

Likewise. Works in Netscape 4.7 and 7 too. Current results
are about 60-40 in favour of compulsion.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
Originally posted by Colin McKenzie
David Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:43:34 +0000 someone who may be
> Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>>People might like to ask the BBC to provide some balance.
>>
>>It seems to be very well-balanced already. [snip] Which
>>nicely balance the argument.
>
> Which was not there in the original story. They have
> obviously been lobbied by people and changed the story
> quite dramatically from the original regurgitation of
> B**** propaganda. Several paragraphs are new, as are some
> of the links.
>

BBC Newsround (for children) on web and Ceefax, regurgitates
the usual rubbish, and says nothing about helmets not
providing the claimed benefits. There's a vote which allows
you to vote against compulsion only on the grounds that it
would reduce cycling. It's at: <http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/c-
bbcnews/hi/vote/votes/newsid_3565000/3565727.stm?dynamic_vo-
te=ON#vote_3565727>

Pro-choice is losing at present - please vote.

Colin McKenzie

What a **** question. Its not just yes or no, Its

Yes, more children will be saved

or

No, no one will cycle any more. Bit like an old fasioned communist election that one.
 
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 13:04:36 GMT, robbiew
<[email protected]> wrote (more or less):

>What a **** question. Its not just yes or no, Its
>
>Yes, more children will be saved
>
>or
>
>No, no one will cycle any more. Bit like an old fasioned
>communist election that one.

Reminds me of the old NTNO'CN sketch about discussion shows
which ends with the line: "Next week we discuss nuclear
power - do you want all your hair to fall out and your skin
to fall off in large scaly lumps? Or not?"

Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
 

Similar threads