Helping out the ASA

The Advertising Standards Authority (@ASA_UK) have landed themselves in a little hot water. An adjudication of complaints against one of Cycling Scotlands misguided Niceway Code campaign videos. This particular video was actually one of the few that was not disingenuous or victim blaming, so it is somewhat ironic that the ASA decided it was 'socially irresponsible'.

However, the assessment is clearly written by a person who has little understanding of neither cycling or the Highway Code. Given that the ASA is likely to be a little busy sending out stock responses to all who have complained about the adjudication, I thought I'd save them some time by re-writing the assessment:

Assessment

Not Upheld

The ASA acknowledged that the ad was primarily encouraging motorists to take care when driving within the vicinity of cyclists. This is a good thing.

We noted that the cyclist in the final scene was not wearing a helmet or any other safety attire, and appeared to be more than 0.5 metres from the gutter. We also acknowledged that the cyclist was shown in broad daylight on a fairly large lane without any traffic.

We understand that UK law does not require cyclists to wear helmets. However, it would be detrimental to the health and well being society as a whole to attempt to enforce (by proxy) the wearing of cycle helmets by only allowing helmeted cyclists to be seen in advertisements.

We understand that drivers of motor vehicles have an extra duty of due care and attention towards vulnerable road users. Reflective clothing may provide additional visibility in the dark or in poor conditions but it does not absolve drivers of their responsibilities. This advertisement shows a clear day with exceptional visibility. 

Furthermore, the person on the bicycle is riding in a safe position that ensures she is seen by other road users and also to avoid the dangerous road surface ahead of her. This advertisement clearly condones a safe approach to cycling in an urban environment.

Drivers of motor vehicles should expect such behaviour and drive at an appropriate speed and distance from vulnerable road users to ensure their health and safety. Under the UK Highway Code, Rule 213:

Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.

The driver of the overtaking vehicle should expect to have to slow down and to use the right hand lane to overtake only when it is safe to do so.

Action

None.

Update

@magnatom has written a reminder of where our focus should lie. I cannot disagree with anything he says - we must fight to get justice. However, it was a jury of our peers that found a man not guilty of anything after killing a man in broad daylight. 

These jurors are influenced by the media. Advertising is all pervasive and (deliberately) trying to influence opinion. 

The ASA judgement, if allowed to stand, will reinforce the belief that only motor vehicles have the right to be on our roads. The message could not be clearer: drivers are absolved of any responsibility towards vulnerable road users who stray into the motor domain.

The pernicious nature of this continual drip of pro-motoring, anti-cyclic rhetoric from perceived 'authorities' has a real and lasting impact on the safety and well being of vulnerable road users.

It is absolutely critical that we continue to address both the justice and the culture that shapes that justice.