My focus here at Cyclelicious has shifted over the past nine (nine!) years. I still try to touch on national (for the USA) issues, racer fanboy fun and the occasional product pitch, but for 2013 I emphasized advocacy issues, using northern California regional projects with a view to encouraging and informing advocates nationwide.
At the same time, my readership has dropped by about 30% from previous years. Part of this has been the expansion of corporate social media sites and my decision to abandon explicit search marketing. On the other hand, I’ve noticed significantly more of you return to read this site. I’m humbled and grateful for your loyalty.
A side effect of a highly loyal readership is that you all don’t click on ads — they’re invisible to you. I’m fine with that, but I still have bills to pay, so you might see a little bit of link bait again for 2014.
Where do I find link bait?
Kristen from Loveland, Colorado served as our guest professor last night for the online discussion we call #bikeschool. She asked a good question:
Q6: What would you like to see from a #cycling website as regards health benefits? #bikeschool
— velohut | kristin (@velohut) January 10, 2014
Ding ding ding! Instant online focus group! I realize she’s doing this for the benefit of her own cycling website, but, hey, I’ll gladly glom on to this.
Some of the answers I personally thought would fit with Cyclelicious included:
- How it positively impacts the NORMAL rider.
- I’m very much a “why” person. I’d like information that says “this helps and here is physiologically why.”
- A white paper on the health benefits of A to B riding. There’s too much about road work and fitness for the fit.
- Nothing too didactic. Stuff like “This worked for me.”
- How to avoid air pollution when Bike Commuting.
Those of you who know me know I’m a numbers guy, so you can see how some of the above topics fit.
I’ll continue to report on local issues, and try to present them as case studies that can be applied nationwide.
Is there anything you’d like to see? Let me know in the comments and I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
I’d be interested to see bike safety comparisons across the US. I know SF and apparently SJ are pretty unsafe, I just learned that Portland has the bike lanes/parked cars reversed to create a barricade between cyclists and drivers, and there was that viral video of the cyclist in NY who got ticketed for riding outside a bike lane. Also, I swear I found a study on SF street safety called “Designed to Kill,” but I have yet to find it since I first came across it two years ago.
Anything comparing urban planning strategies/safety/death stats would definitely be interesting for me.
Given my recent run in with the law on my bike and the inherent anti-cyclist bias the officer showed I’d be curious if this shows up nationally. I know there is a pro-car bias for all drivers, but I am curious if police have an extra bias against cyclists, not sure if you’d have any numbers on that or if they even exist though.
Running now but just a quick note: Santa Cruz has 4x the cycling as Portland, and also usually has zero fatalities per year. The past couple of years have been bad, but overall Santa Cruz is probably safer for cyclists than PDX. More later.
I didn’t know that about Santa Cruz, you are talking percent of population? One problem with cycling fatalities and counting is the numbers are relatively low (way too many if you are involved…) Nationwide there are a little more than 2 fatalities per day about for cyclists, more are killed per hour by/in cars….
Still more work needs to be done to make people realize that cycling isn’t very dangerous. Cycling per hour of activity is about as dangerous as driving a car and they are encased in a steel cage…
For police bias they need more cops out on bikes. Even if they have to rotate then through the assignment.