Bobby Holley Performs--And Delivers --For Kids

 Bobby Holley is a musician (With a name like that, what else could he be?), entertainer and teacher in Battle Creek, Michigan.  Last year, he also took on another role: He became a kind of summertime Santa Claus, giving bicycles and helmets to kids in need.

Bobby Holley.  Photo by Trace Christinson, for the Battle Creek Enquirer.

He's reprising that role this year.  Today, he's distributing 125 bikes and helmets to needy children, in first through sixth grades, in Battle Creek and neighboring Marshall.  The recipients were chosen on the basis of  essays they wrote about on the prompt, "Why I Need A Bike."

The bicycles and helmets will be given out at Seelye Kia of Battle Creek.  The car dealership donated 33 of the bikes in an effort led by salesman Keith Wright.  Other businesses donated bikes, some of which were collected as Holley performed, solo or with his band.  

Apparently, he plans to continue this work.  If you miss his performances, you can donate to the drive at Church of Living Water, P.O. Box 2296, Battle Creek, Michigan 49016.

Af

How "Bicycle Friendly" Is It?

Yesterday, in "Windshield Bias," I described  the way bike issues are covered in the media and how it's affected public perceptions and policy.  I focused on how the stories are covered in Boston because the question of media coverage came to my attention via a Boston Streetsblog stories.

One thing I touched upon is the perception vs. reality of "bicycle friendliness."  I mentioned that it's a relative term. Sure, there are bike lanes and "safety" laws in some jurisdictions.  But, on the whole, the US is a motor-centric country and most policy and planning is done by people who don't cycle, walk or even take mass transportation.

Photo by Samantha Carey, for Boston magazine.

Recently, Boston was chosen as  America's eighth- most "bike friendly" city by Clever, a real-estate data company. Of course, such a study by a real estate data company is suspect.  Still, some will give it credibility.  But not everyone, according to a survey done by Boston.com.

Respondents echoed many of the observations and complaints I've made in this blog, including bike lanes that appear and end abruptly, snow that is plowed and debris dumped into them, and hostile drivers. On the other hand, other respondents echoed what you hear from bike-phobic folks everywhere:  "They're taking away our parking spaces!"  

What the survey confirms, for me, is something that one respondent expressed--and I've said, as recently as yesterday, on this blog:  "bicycle-friendly" is a relative term, at least in the United States of America.

Windshield Bias

Many of us envy countries like the Netherlands and Denmark, where people cycle even if they have other transportation or recreation options.  Here in the US, we have "bicycle friendly" (a relative term, to be sure) islands in a motor-centric sea.

One reason for the difference between the cycling environments has to do with policies. Europeans seem to understand what it takes to make bicycling safe and practical enough for people to choose it over driving or other forms of transportation, at least for short trips. In America, on the other hand the notion of "bicycle friendliness" seems to consist of building bicycle lanes--which, as I've said in other posts, are too often poorly-conceived, -constructed and -maintained--and passing "safety" regulations that bear no relation to the experience of riding.

A reason for so much misguided policy, I believe, has to do with media coverage.  I'm not familiar with what the Danes and Dutch print or broadcast, but I suspect that it's less auto-centric than what the French see and hear which, in turn, seems like tout l'Equipe compared to what we see on our pages and screens in America.

Now, some might say that I am in a "Big Apple Bubble."  It's true that on many issues--including, ahem, gun rights (Guns have rights?)--most New Yorkers, including yours truly, think differently from a state legislator in Mississippi or Texas.  But from what I've been seeing and hearing, New York City's news stories aren't the only ones infected with "windshield bias."

That apt phrase came to me from Christian MilNeil, a reporter on the Boston edition of Streetsblog.  In his article, he describes how the city's broadcast news programs and newspapers have framed the debates in neighboring Cambridge over bike lanes and pedestrianizing public spaces.  He noted something I've seen here in New York: the debates are too often framed as "bike lanes vs. parking spaces" or some other false equivalency, as in "we have more important issues, like gun violence and affordable housing."

I will not argue that gun violence and affordable housing are not urgent issues. But comparing issues is not useful.  Moreover, how does making a park car-free prevent the  construction of apartments and houses that people and families can afford on worker's wages?  Or passing a law that would keep people who aren't old enough to drink or who have mental health issues from acquiring military-style assault weapons?  

Speaking of which:  A car, especially an SUV, is as deadly a weapon as an AR-15 when an unbalanced person is at the wheel.  If policy-makers actually want to encourage more people to pedal or walk to work or school, they could take measures to prevent and more severely punish violence committed against cyclists and pedestrians in which the motor vehicle is the weapon.  

But I digress.  MilNeil's article shows that while coverage in Boston's print media has been somewhat more balanced, the city's television and other electronic media are heavily skewed toward organizations like "Save Mass Ave" who argue that building bike lanes will destroy their businesses.  Too often, he points out, stories show only outraged owners of the businesses in question or give only a few seconds to a cycling or pedestrian advocate.

(For the record, the Cambridge City Council has consistently favored policies to build bike lanes and ban cars from parks and other public areas.)

Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge.  Photo from Boston Streetsblog.

I suspect that some of that distortion is inevitable.  For one thing, I'd guess that most reporters and editors aren't cyclists and probably don't often walk to get to wherever they're going.  But there is a more important built-in bias, I think:  As we've seen all too clearly during since Trump launched his first Presidential campaign, loud, angry voices are better than calm voices relating facts at "bringing the eyeballs to the screens" or keeping earbuds in ears. 

Could it be that we need advocates who foam at the mouth the way some folks do when their right to have as many and whatever kind of guns--or parking spaces--as they want. Or to use them whenever, whenever they want.