You are hereWhy The Austin-American Statesman is probably on their way out...
Why The Austin-American Statesman is probably on their way out...
I just saw this editorial piece from yesterday's Austin-American Statesman, and am realizing why paper news is dead. Seriously, the writer of the editorial checks their facts less than I do and I'M A BLOGGER. The "article" is a slanderous piece of yellow journalism written against the city's Bicycle/Pedestrian Program, the new Bike Plan initiative, and the Austin cycling community in general.
The entire piece is pretty ridiculous, but my favorite snippet of absurdity was the following suggestion to help "achieve a biking program that works as well for the other 95% of its non-biking residents":
Require bikers to carry an ID. That way, when some unsuspecting driver runs them off the road, police can identify their dead body. (For suggestions on tombstone wording, go to www.ButIhadtherightofway.com.)
Classy. One commenter to the story pointed out that the reason Cindy Stone wrote this piece was due to the city re-striping the street in front of her house, but that's just an assumption. No matter her reason, her view of the "Biker Wars" seems somewhat skewed. Reading shit like that in the newspaper makes me realize why people actually take blogs halfway seriously. "Real news" is a joke.
"4) Require bikers to carry liability insurance." What a shitty idea. As if the whole concept of insurance wasn't bullshit enough (not to mention a total rip-off), let's spread it to bikes and let some more fat stupid cubicle working claims agents get their noses and wallets into matters that don't involve them. While we're at it, why don't we force pedestrians to carry insurance and pets too - I mean I want to be able to sue if somebody bumps into me or sue a dog that takes a shit on my lawn. I deserve money as compensation for everything! Yesss! Sweet sweet money!
There was a meeting a few months ago at the library near Exposition and Windsor to discuss what should happen when Exposition gets restriped. Most of the people were very polite, and wanted to see if there was some form of on-street parking in the works (and they got it, one side of the street has parking, and a bike lane in the "door zone, more or less). This woman basically said "exposition is just like mopac but has a different name, and no cyclists have any business on it because I don't see why they should need to use it." She also used an anecdote about how her 83 year old mother needs the parking on one side of the street so restriping shouldn't happen because of that. She was very self absorbed, to my eye, and basically ignored Annick Beaudet when she was talking about the surveys the city has conducted that conclude that exposition is a very important cycling route. I could go on, but there is no point - some people think only their lives matter in the grand scheme of things, and there isn't much that can be done about that.
She sounds like a total self-entitled control freak.
We should all relax and not take this ill-written, awful excuse for an editorial too seriously. Cindy Stone probably has forgotten what it feels like to have anything stiff between her legs. Or maybe she's got something very stiff stuck up her rear. Nevertheless, she shouldn't be putting out such negativity on something so public, and the Statesman should do a better job of editing editorials if they hope to print another day. Maybe that's why they're for sale? Personally, I haven't read that dribble since the Delay/Craddick days of yore. Sad, sad state of affairs over at the "hometown" paper.