It's been two days since we first shared the "Stop pedaling... Start driving." General Motors ad and the story — and the ad itself — is still getting a lot of attention. GM themselves has responded by saying they'll pull the ad out of rotation, several people (and one bike company) have offered their own versions of the ad, the national and local media has taken an interest, and the story has spurred an interesting discussion about the state — and the style — of bike advocacy in America.

Not long after word of the ad spread, GM began apologizing profusely about it via their Twitter stream. They said the "didn't mean to offend," that it was created with the help of students, and that they were open to the feedback and working on changes. Then the Los Angeles reported that GM decided to pull the ad saying that, "We respect bikers and many of us here are cyclists."

It remains to be seen if we'll hear anything more from GM about this; but it's worth noting that this isn't new territory for them. Not only is GM widely alleged to have purposely destroyed public transit in America, but, as Carlton Reid, editor of UK trade magazine BikeBiz pointed out to me yesterday, one of their subsidiaries (Chevrolet) ran an ad in 2005 that referred to transit riders as "creeps and weirdos." In addition, GM has yet to comment about how they negatively portray a woman walking on a sidewalk in the same "Stop pedaling" ad campaign.

GM's ad has also spurred a broad and negative response from many people. Their Facebook wall has been bombarded with criticism.

Is this the type of response they were looking for?

One BikePortland reader even sent an email to U.S. Congressman Earl Blumenauer that read in part:

"GM needs more than some inconsequential public outcry in response to their anti-people campaign; they need a sound thrashing by the federal government, and one that will teach them well not to bite the hand that fed them."

Others have responded by sharing a revision of the ad. Even Giant Bicycles, the world's largest bicycle manufacturer, got into the act...

And here's one by Kieran O'Neill from the AMS Bike Co-op in Vancouver, BC...

By Kieran O'Neill

And from Russ Roca of Path Less Pedaled fame...

By Russ Roca

Not surprisingly, media outlets have jumped on the story. The L.A. Times blog post linked to above was edited and appears in today's print version. The Washington Post has a story planned, ABC News picked it up, and I'm talking with local ABC affiliate KATU about the ad later today.

For DL Byron, a bike culture connoisseur and the man behind the BikeHugger blog and social media empire, the reaction to the ad by bike advocates and other bike-interested folks is off base. "There goes bike culture again," he tweeted, "playing the victim, instead of spinning the @gm ad to their favor." In a discussion he's started on Google Plus, Byron wrote:

"Bicycle advocates just handed GM a win. I'd have ignored it. They look great, we look like dicks. The lead-in to the PI story was, "don't make cyclist mad." Cause, ya know, they're angry zealots. My issue is short-sighted reactionary tactics don't help us. They reinforce why people don't like us."

Byron is right that bicycling has a big PR problem in America. But I don't think it's wise to site idly by while one of America's largest corporations irresponsibly and unnecessarily takes a blatant potshot at bicycling just to sell cars — especially when that company has such a horrible legacy around non-car transportation.

As for whether GM won or lost the PR battle. I could argue either way. They definitely got a lot of attention and given their marketing sophistication, I wouldn't be shocked if they planned the whole thing. However, times are changing and more Americans than ever realize that this isn't just about bikes vs. cars: This is about being a responsible member of our society. As the current Occupy Wall Street movement is showing, many people are no longer willing to let corporate America get away with such shenanigans.

In that email to Congressman Blumenauer, a man wrote,

"I want you to know that my voice is among the 99%, and I want you to tell Congress and the President for me — and for all of us — that the USA won't tolerate General Motors' treachery against the people of the USA as manifested with impunity by their ad in The Stanford Daily."

UPDATE: GM has just posted an official statement/apology on their website. Also, I got a call from GM spokesman Tom Henderson. I'll share his thoughts in a separate post.

The October issue of Bicycling Magazine includes a big feature article on the cargo bike revolution that's sweeping the country.

Portland, with our flourishing cargo bike scene, figures prominently into the article. There's copy and photos devoted to a local bike move and mentions of local cargo bike shop Splendid Cycles, B-Line Sustainable Urban Delivery, custom cargo bike builders Metrofiets and fave bike-inspired hangout Hopworks Urban Brewery.

The story is titled, "Is this the Coolest Bike Ever Made?" and the cover teaser is "This Bike Will Save the World: Why Don't You Have One?"

It's great to see such a mainstream and wide-reaching magazine as Bicycling (with high-end, deep-dish carbon racing wheels just a few pages away) feature such a quality story about the potential of cargo bikes to transform America.

Since Clever Cycles introduced help popularize cargo bikes in Portland, they've had a huge impact on our city in many different ways. Lets hope this solid exposure leads to more cities going cargo crazy.

The popular Oregon Public Broadcasting radio show, Think Out Loud, will tackle PBOT's North Williams Traffic Safety Project tomorrow.

Here's how OPB sets up tomorrow's one-hour discussion:

"North Williams Avenue in Portland has become a controversial street in the last few months. Currently, on the one way street, there are two lanes for cars plus a bike lane, but the bike lane often overflows as cyclists leave downtown at rush hour. The Portland Bureau of Transportation planned on transforming one of the two car lanes into a wider bike lane, but the project has been delayed. That's because some in the historically African-American neighborhood felt that the project didn't adequately address important issues like gentrification, equity and race."

The show plans on tackling a "perception in some quarters that the City of Portland is more concerned with increasing bicycling than it is with helping minorities."

Unfortunately, in their blog post, OPB includes a myth about bicycling that continues to perpetuate and poison discussions citywide. They refer to a recent Skanner article where an African-American man said, "…bike lanes will get $600 million over the next 20 years, but there is half a million for gang outreach for the next two years."

As I hope we all know by now, it is factually incorrect to say that the City is spending $600 million on "bike lanes." That number is simply the sum total of the wish list of projects included in the 2030 Bike Plan and no such funding commitment has ever been made. (Unfortunately, The Skanner isn't the only local paper to allow this falsehood to perpetuate.)

That quibble aside, I'm glad that OPB is taking on this sensitive and complex topic.

I've accepted an invitation to be in-studio for the show and I look forward to the discussion. To weigh in and be a part of the conversation, chime in over on the Think out Loud blog.

Not surprisingly, the article has spurred hundreds of comments, many of them by angry Portlanders who don't like the idea of any spending that benefits bicycling and who feel Adams' priorities are not in the right place.

Seem like a déjà vu? Unfortunately, it's not out of character for him or for The Oregonian to frame a bike news story in a way that makes readers take sides. Whether it's referring to a "cold war" on our streets and warning of an impending "backlash" against people who ride bikes, dropping an inaccurate and biased story on the Idaho Stop proposal the day before it was heard by legislators, or sensationalizing road rage to sell papers (which they later admitted to) — we've seen this happen time and time again.

This time around, Rose's framing of the budget is very one-sided. I won't repeat the details because responses to his article have already been published by The Portland Mercury and by the Mayor's office.

We can argue about how he presented the numbers all day long, but what's more concerning to me is the divisive tone the article uses.

Mayor Adams didn't simply make a change in how he allocates this discretionary money, he "quietly boosted the amount...on bike projects." Quietly? This is just a few paragraphs after Rose points out that Adams announced the rise in bike spending at a crowded bike event last month.

After "quietly boosting" bike spending, the Mayor then, "slashed" the amount for motor vehicles. And of course, all this money, Rose points out, "is generated entirely by motorists." Wait. I'm confused. What's a motorist? I drive my mini-van around town all the time, does that mean I'm paying for these "bike projects" too?! What about my "motor vehicle projects"!

I put those terms into quotes because I don't think anyone is well-served by dividing money up into "bike" and "car" projects. It's just silly and it's a lazy way to create a controversy. Not only that, but it's an imperfect science to tease out what part of projects are "bike" and what parts are "motor vehicle."*

I ride my bike around town a lot and I like new traffic signals and repaving; both of which are considered "car projects" in City documents. When I'm driving, I prefer to be on roads where there's a bit of separation between me and people riding bikes so I don't have to worry as much about hitting one of them. Therefore, don't "bike projects" also benefit me when I drive a car? (As we saw on SE Holgate, new bikeways mean fewer people are being hurt and killed.)

Rose also forgets to tell his readers that in the long run, spending money in a way that gets more people bicycling might actually lead to more money for paving. Unlike cars, trucks and buses, bikes have little to no impact on the road surface.

So, let's see what the community thinks...

To get the pulse on the Mayor's budget decisions, Rose asks East Portland resident Rick Bradford; the same Rick Bradford who's trying to mount grassroots opposition to the Holgate buffered bike lane project and the same Rick Bradford who remains opposed to the project despite significant safety benefits that have resulted from it.

Here's the Bradford mention:

"But unlike sidewalks, many new bike projects seem excessive, said Rick Bradford. The East Portland resident and computer repairman is leading a campaign to remove what he says are hardly used buffered bike lanes on Southeast Holgate Boulevard.

The city reduced Holgate from four lanes to two for the bike lanes from 122nd to Interstate 205 that he said seem to start and go "nowhere."

From the framing and word choice, to the interviews he chose to highlight, it sure seems like Rose is once again poisoning what could have been a perfectly interesting and important story and turning it into an us-versus-them, bikes-versus-cars, Adams-versus-everyone story.

Makes me start to wonder what's going on over there.

It seems Rose isn't the only reporter at The Oregonian who knows bikes versus cars will get attention: Check out the lede below used by The Oregonian's City Hall reporter Brad Schmidt in a story that highlights Rose's article:

Few things in Portland are as polarizing as bikes. Throw in more government spending for bike-related transportation improvements -- and less for cars -- and you create the perfect storm.

With stories like these, The Oregonian should acknowledge their responsibility for creating that "polarizing" environment.

Further reading:
— The Portland Mercury: Here's the story of Portland's budget: Bike projects aren't stealing money from cars
— Mayor Sam Adams' website: The Oregonian Gets it Wrong
— Joseph Rose follow-up story: Readers respond
— The BTA's response: Increase in bike spending is progress for everyone

*(Note: Rose isn't to blame for teasing out the spending by mode, Mayor Adams has done that for years now after bikes advocates thought it'd be an easier way to track spending levels. Personally, I've said it's a bad idea to break out the spending and this Rose article is a perfect example why I feel that way.)

Just because it's a handmade bike show, doesn't mean there isn't other news to cover here in Austin. On that note, last night I ran into Mia Kohout, co-publisher of Momentum Magazine. The successful bike lifestyle publication based in Vancouver, B.C. celebrates its 50th issue with their March edition and Kohout had some major news to share... Momentum has undergone a serious makeover.

The March issue with the new look hasn't been printed up yet, but Kohout gave me a sneak peek. Saying the new design is "cleaner and a little more mainstream" Kohout said the changes reflect their goal of, "trying to speak to people that aren't doing this yet."

By "this," Kohout means living the bicycle lifestyle.

Creative director Jim Nissen and
co-publisher Mia Kohout.

The biggest change is a new logo/wordmark that shortens Momentum to "Mo" and the new tagline "Smart living by bike." Momentum hired Jim Nissen, a magazine design and marketing consultant to be its creative director and he worked with Kohout, along with her co-publisher Tania Lo, on the new design.

Kohout says she hopes the new look of the magazine, which has more white space and a clean layout reminiscent of a magazine like Real Simple, is meant to connect with who they see as their target readers — "conscientious urban professionals," which she describes as 30-50 year olds living in cities within four miles of their work. Kohout compared their editorial approach with Wired. "It's a technology magazine, but it's also about the technology lifestyle."

Look for the new, all grown-up Momentum in your mailbox or at your local bike shop in the next few weeks.

One of our local alternative weekly magazines, The Willamette Week, made an interesting choice for their weekly "Rogue of the Week" feature. They've given the label to the "haters" of the 50s Bikeway who showed up to last week's first public open house on the project.

Here's a snip from the Willamette Week story:

"The sorrow on display by supposedly parking-starved residents... was of apocalyptic proportions...

If they had a legitimate concern, we’d listen. But most of the whining last week had to do with what some Portlanders consider an inalienable right—free on-street parking...

“Don’t take away parking on 52nd,” one read. “This is a terrible idea!” “What about the elderly?” asked another, with no explanation for what that meant. “Nobody bikes here anyway,” asserted another."

The 50s Bikeway is a federally funded project that will build a 4.5 mile north-south bikeway along 52nd and 53rd streets. A major decision in the project is whether or not to reallocate road space in the southern portion of the route that is currently used to store private motor vehicles in order to make room for the bikeway. Learn more about that in a story we published prior to the open house and read past coverage at our 50s Bikeway story tag.

NOTE: I don't want folks to get the wrong impression about the 50s Bikeway open house. I was not there and we didn't do any coverage of it... But from what I heard and read, it was a very strong turn out and the vast majority of people were excited and supportive of the plans that PBOT has come up with. Stay tuned for more on this project.

Portlandia is the new, six-part IFC miniseries that's getting a lot of buzz around these parts for its attempts to poke fun at Portland's idiosyncrasies. Back before the holidays, we shared a bit about it over on Page Two because, as you might expect, bicycling figures prominently into the show.

Now, in a newly released teaser clip titled Bicycle Rights!, Portlandia's co-lead actor Fred Armisen gives us a taste of how they'll handle the subject...

I can't wait to see the full skit. I think it's hilarious. How about you?

More on Portlandia here.

"... a far more common sight than a chassis shattered in an explosion is now one destroyed in a nasty crash."
— The Economist

The Economist, one of the world's leading news magazines, has an article in this week's issue that really caught my attention (it actually had several, but this one is relevant to BikePortland).

Turns out that that car crashes (unfortunately referred to as "accidents" by The Economist), are now more dangerous than war in Baghdad. According to their story, "the health ministry estimates that six times as many people now die in car accidents as fall victim to political violence."

Apparently in Baghdad, "reckless driving is the norm." What's worse, is that it appears Americans are exporting their disregard for road safety to countries we invade/occupy/are at war in. The Economist reports that one major problem that is leaded to deadly car wrecks is "A tendency to beat the traffic by driving up the wrong side of the road—learnt from American security contractors..."

Interestingly, the reporter posits that Iraqis' relationship with "imminent death from a bomb or a bullet" has leaked into their view of roads as a battlefield; and this isn't about insurgents and car bombs, which remain a threat the Economist says, "But a far more common sight than a chassis shattered in an explosion is now one destroyed in a nasty crash."

And if you think we've got it tough here in America trying to get folks to improve their behavior on the road, Baghdad has its own set of unique challenges:

Nonetheless, there are limits to the government’s commitment to road safety. Politicians, security forces and American military convoys (often with Iraqi escorts nowadays) still tend to drive down the middle of Baghdad streets, forcing everybody else to stop. And on December 15th the Karrada district was congested for hours when roads were sealed off for the official opening of the new headquarters of the traffic police.

Read the full article here.

A local TV news outlet is questioning the safety benefit of a crossing treatment recently completed as part of the N. Going bike boulevard project.

I got an email from Scott Burton at KGW TV (Portland's NBC affiliate) on Friday that they were doing a story about the crossing on their 11 o'clock news. Burton said they've received several complaints that since the change, the crossing has become more dangerous. He also said they witnessed a few close calls (bike/car) and that a person walking across was "severely injured" after being hit by a car last week.

I was surprised to hear all of this because I've heard just the opposite. In fact, I was in a meeting the same day I heard from Burton where a friend was telling me how successful he thought the new treatment was because cars were stopping well in advance of the new crossing (thanks to new signs/markings installed by PBOT).

(For more on the new crossing, read our report about it back in March. It's also worth noting that PBOT initially wanted to install a new type of pavement marking, dubbed "crossbikes", but those didn't make it into the final plans.)

But from the tone of the KGW story (it was titled "Concerns surround bike boulevard") and from the interviews and reporting they did in their story Friday night, perhaps I just haven't heard what's really going on out there. Watch the short segment below that ran on the Friday evening newscast (or read it here):

Since many of you reading this are legally considered to be "vulnerable" road users, I'm curious what you think about this intersection. Is this a safety concern for you? Do you think it gives a false sense of security to people on bikes? Should we be pressing PBOT to install a signal? Please share your perspective in the comments below...

What do our bikeways have to do with baseball? Nothing. But that doesn't stop Canzano from blaming the inability of Portland to hold onto a professional baseball team, at least in part, to "those silly bike lanes."

Here's an excerpt from his column (emphasis mine):

"Guilty, too, is the visionless City Council... afraid to ask Portland to act like a major city.

Oh, we have an aerial tram, that ran four times ($57 million) the original budget. And we have those silly bike lanes and a $613 million Portland Bicycle Plan. But what Portland doesn't have after today is a Triple-A baseball team playing in a ballpark where you can bring your family. A piece of the infrastructure of a city just got ripped out.

I'll think about that every time I see the underused bike lanes and that blasted empty tram running overhead. And you should never forget the names of the politicians who were on watch the next time you go to cast a vote...

What kind of city does Portland want to be?"

What makes this so surprising is that Canzano isn't just another columnist, he's consistently named one of the best sportswriters in America.

Perhaps Canzano simply doesn't realize that tens of thousands of Portlanders rely on bike lanes every day (and many people take them to Beavers games!), or that, unlike baseball, providing safe and efficient non-motorized transportation infrastructure is an essential service our City is obligated to provide.

Unfortunately, Canzano is using bike infrastructure as a scapegoat when he's really just upset at Mayor Sam Adams. This is a common occurrence in Portland. Here's how it works:

Mayor Adams is closely tied to his "bike-friendly mayor" label and there are many people in this city who think he's nothing more than a pawn of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance and "a vocal pocket of elites" -- both of which are so untrue it's laughable. So, whenever someone gets upset at the Mayor's policies, they look around and find bicycles as a convenient and powerful whipping boy. Journalists have an added incentive to take a few swipes at bicycling because they know it's a surefire way to whip up emotions (Canzano's article had 189 comments at last check).

It's also worth noting that Canzano joins a legacy of negative, biased, and sensationalized reporting about bicycles in The Oregonian. In July of 2008, when criticized about a string of sensationalized "bike vs. car" stories, The Oregonian's Associate Editor Rick Attig admitted, "Maybe we overplayed this story, but it was compelling to readers..."

Back in June, when NW Examiner publisher Allan Classen went on his "bicycle zealots" diatribe, I shared the following thoughts:

"This is just the latest example of the culture wars around biking that persist here in Portland... Biking is a convenient scapegoat, a frequently tossed political football, and a common source of sensationalized reporting."

The BTA's new leader Rob Sadowsky has published an "open letter" to Canzano. A big baseball fan himself, Sadowsky writes that, "It is not now and should never be a choice between investing in baseball or investing in bicycling." Sadowsky then invited Canzano on a bike ride to show him, "the great things that are going on, talk about the challenges, and lament the loss of baseball."

Read Canzano's piece here.