- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Cross country mountain bikes
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
BBC LTN report"Shameful": BBC "perpetuated falsehoods" in divisive low traffic neighbourhood report
A Labour peer who is a patron of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Cycling and Walking says that a BBC News report yesterday on low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) ignored evidence and “perpetuated concerning falsehoods.” Lord Berkeley also said that in the report, the broadcaster had “embarked on its own journey to stir up a manufactured culture war.”
He made the accusations in a letter sent today to David Jordan, the BBC’s Director of Editorial Policy and Standards following the broadcast of the report, which was widely condemned on social media as “one-sided", as we reported on our live blog yesterday.
Our patron Lord @tonyberkeley1 has written to the BBC's Director of Editorial Standards about a report on LTNs. The report "did not contain any data or facts relating to the efficacy of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, as you might expect from the BBC’s Science and Environment unit." pic.twitter.com/uLWgLs7Aeu
— APPGCW (@allpartycycling) March 18, 2021
The report included Ealing Central & Acton Labour MP Rupa Huq – whose constituency lies in the London Borough of Ealing, and who has been a vocal critic of LTNs being rolled out by the Labour controlled council –insisting that they were a more contentious issue than “air strikes on Syria, Brexit and coronavirus.”
> BBC slammed for MP's unchallenged claim that LTNs are more contentious than air strikes on Syria
In his letter, Lord Berkeley said: “I believe that this piece did not meet the required standards of Impartiality … within the BBC Editorial Guidelines.
“The report which was broadcast online and on TV did not contain any data or facts relating to the efficacy of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, as you might expect from the BBC’s Science and Environment Unit. This data is readily available and comprehensive.
“Instead, it perpetuated concerning falsehoods on public safety despite evidence, for example, that introducing Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in Waltham Forest led to an overall reduction of street crime, particularly violent and sexual offences, according to a study. The research shows there was a 10 per cent fall in street crime over one year.”
LTNs, which use bollards and planters to filter out rat-running traffic through residential areas, while maintaining access for residents, the emergency services and others needing access to the area, have been around for decades.
However, the proliferation of such schemes over the past year in response to the coronavirus pandemic, particularly in London, has seen a small but vocal minority emerge that is opposed to them.
Among the arguments deployed against them is that they increase air pollution by creating more congestion on main roads, that they benefit privileged areas at the expense of poorer ones, and that they prevent the police, fire service and ambulance crews from responding to emergencies – all claims that do not stand up to close examination.
But even when councils respond to such concerns, as Ealing did by removing bollards to ensure emergency services would not be held up, instead deploying CCTV cameras, plus appropriate signage highlighting that certain roads were closed to motor vehicles, the council was accused of using LTNs as a revenue-raising scam – a “myth” that also cropped up in the BBC piece.
That led a councillor in Kendal, Cumbria, to brand the piece as “shameful,” adding in a tweet that he could “state with certainty that fines are absolutely nothing to do with raising revenue, and everything to do with disincentivising behaviour.
In the past week, opponents of LTNs have come up with another supposed argument against them, using the murder of Sarah Everard to claim that they may make the streets unsafe for women – although, from what is known of the police investigation to date, it appears that the 33 year old was abducted as she walked home along the busy South Circular Road in Clapham.
The safety of women was an issue that came up in the BBC report, and one that Lord Berkeley referred to in his letter.
“A contributor made a statement that a taxi driver could not access her property and this went unchallenged,” he wrote. “This is not the case in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods where all residential properties remain accessible, albeit via a slightly longer route.”
The peer also brought up another issue highlighted on social media yesterday by Adam Tranter, founder of the Bike Is Better campaign whose members include brands, retailers and organisations within the British cycling industry.
> Criticism floods in for BBC's “one-sided” LTN piece “fuelling culture wars”
“The BBC Impartiality guidelines also cover conduct of staff on social media," Lord Berkely went on. "In relation to a video of a man shouting and swearing near families in a residential street, the reporter Justin Rowlatt described this as ‘brilliant’."
The reporter later claimed that he was using the word as a “euphemism," and it was “not meant as an endorsement."
But Lord Berkeley said: “As somebody who uses a bicycle as a mode of transport, it’s concerning that the BBC would take such an approving view on content featuring language and rhetoric which undoubtedly makes the journeys of vulnerable road users less safe.
“Furthermore, multiple instances of illegal behaviour – death threats, criminal damage, driving on the pavement, driving while filming with a mobile phone – were featured without question or comment. Normalising this illegal behaviour as if it is part of normal and reasoned debate is dangerous and has real-world consequences.”
Lord Berkeley continued: “I believe, as do many others, that the BBC has a responsibility to report accurately and fairly on matters relating to the environment and climate change, the biggest challenge of our lifetime.
“The majority of Britain’s greenhouse gas emissions now come from transport with emissions from road transport making up around a fifth of the UK’s total greenhouse gas emissions.
“Rather than have a sensible discussion on how we need to adapt and use our cars less, the BBC embarked on its own journey to stir up a manufactured culture war,” he concluded.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Rendel Harris 41 min 55 sec ago
He made it to the finish abalone, picking off some notable scallops on the way - probably earned a few squid too.
- w61 4 hours 13 min ago
Agreed. Filmores work great and also look less clunky than alternatives.
- David9694 5 hours 13 min ago
Six-year-old's lucky escape as car flips in three-vehicle M6 crash...
- Simon E 6 hours 2 sec ago
I appreciate the thought but it would be far better if they both (and others) were still alive to inspire us. Just think how many more lives they...
- NR23Derek 5 hours 29 min ago
Why are the shared use paths so narrow? Norfolk County Council says "the land wasn't available". In fact, what they mean is they built up to the...
- belugabob 6 hours 38 min ago
I would question whether 96% of drivers have heard of (or understand) the 2022 updates to the highway code, never mind conform to them.
- Jogle 7 hours 29 min ago
I think that the could be distilled to "I don't like cycling and so neither should you. And I don't like buses. Now stop wasting my money on...
- David9694 8 hours 7 min ago
was planning on getting some WD-40 / GT 85 rivalry going, looked it up and now mind blown! 🤯
- snooks 8 hours 42 min ago
Holds it in place better no doubt. It's not complicated.
Add new comment
46 comments
Have you actually ever met someone with "far left" opinions? Some one who felt that the means of production should be owned by the proletariat, that sort of thing? Ever seen that advocated on the BBC? Could you provide perhaps a link to a far left opinion that is promoted on the BBC website?
Would you be ever so kind and post a few links to these polls?
A link to just one far-left article will do
"The BBC is less trusted than other broadcasters"
"Only 8% trusted the BBC a great deal"
37% feel the BBC is impartial. Seems ratios are far worse for their Brexit Bias (second link):
"45 per cent of Leave voters believe the BBC News has an anti-Brexit bias, compared to 14 per cent of Remain voters"
"FEWER people believe the BBC to be an impartial broadcaster than ever"
"Half of Britons feel the BBC does not share their values"
"Brexit representation was at times ‘unbalanced’, says new BBC chairman"
I could write some different headlines for those surveys. You might argue that shows my bias, but nevertheless are consistent with the data.
"Torygraph doesn't like BBC"
"Chinese government attempts to sow distrust in organisations reporting its genocide"
"Most Leavers don't think BBC has anti-Brexit bias"
That's refuted by both the evidence i provided, showing the BBC had 5-times as many remainers as leavers in their coverage, giving them their own echo chamber to perpetuate myths, accusations, and say what they like without balance, and the fact that the Director General (may have got his title wrong) admitted they got it wrong and apologised for the one-sided approach/bias. Anyone who's seen tv coverage or read the news from the BBC in the last few years can see the massive bias evident, especially in regard to some topics, such as Europe and Brexit.
Probably a reflection of the BBC being staffed by higher educated, outward looking, diversity tolerant, younger, ambitious career minded professionals with a priviledged middle class backgound not threatened by mass immigration or competition for low wage jobs.
These polls that you mention do not in themselves support your hypothesis of bias and fitness for purpose, they are merely expressed opinion at the time of response. To apply them as evidence to your hypothesis would be falling for argumentum ad populum
To successfully argue your point it would help if you could identify 2 things
Whereas there are some really egregious failures re reporting (I have mentioned the utter dereliction of duty re climate science elsewhere, and others have referred to the sycophantic "reporting" from Kuensberg and others regarding the PM and wider Tory party on this string), these are not arguments for defunding/privatisation/abolision in themselves.
I utterly agree with your closing sentence, however Eddy's argument still stands (E has outlined a pretty well understood MO for privatisation/removal of successful services), and your response (and indeed the polls you mentioned) might be considered to at least suggest that that MO is working....
A certain former president of the USA used to loudly proclaim that he must be right about things he was objectively wrong about solely because lots of people agreed with him.
That really isn't how it works.
I think if you were to ask that president and many fine people, you'd find that it is.....
Here's the link to make a complaint to the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint/#/Complaint
Complaint registered
Me too
Great letter, but so misinformed; all the rumours about the BBC being rabidly anti-bicycle are clearly disproved by their plethora of programmes and articles featuring bicycles and their massively beneficial effects on congestion, pollution, danger, climate change, obesity, health, community coherence etc, etc. Why, I'm almost sure I remember a programme a mere eighteen years ago which wasn't entirely negative about cycling.
I know the tories have just appointed a new tory BBC chairman, but how do you get a job as a Chief Environment Correspondent when you clearly don't have the faintest interest or clue about the environment?
I'm sure the letter has been copied to the msm, which will begin ignoring it immediately.
Fantastic letter from Lord Berkeley!
Shame he didn't challenge his Labour colleague Rupa Huq, who obviously didn't use her position as an MP to be included.
Pages