Subscribe to
Posts
Comments

Caredig i Natur’s wrongheaded article about pedestrians getting off the pavement continues to exemplify the worst practice in blogging. Having allegedly closed comments on the blog, a selection of positive comments continue to be approved, whilst all negative ones are ignored. Also the writer has started deleting some of the comments they had previously approved! “Who controls the past, controls the future”.

The latest “pro” comment on the “closed” thread reads:

There was a school group using the path at 1.30pm today. The path was totally choked. I can’t believe they allow this. Someone needs to write to the Cambrian News and get the cycle path enforced.

This posted on 23 November at 17:16.

This comment is the most disingenuous – indeed downright dishonest yet!

I was in Plascrug avenue at 1.30pm and I know exactly what school groups were there. Indeed the group on the cycle path was the very same class that Caredig i Natur photographed and published without consent on his blog.

The pertinent fact that the commentator forget to mention is that all but one of them were on bicycles, as they were off to do their cycling proficiency training. No other school group used the cycle path at this time.

There was another school group at almost the same time. Perhaps the commentator meant them and not the cyclist. However, that school group was on the eastern non cycle path pavement. They were there learning to cross the road, and they crossed in pairs and then crossed back. Yes they will have crossed onto the pavement on which cycling is permitted. I presume Caredig i Natur would argue that children not learn to cross the road at this point but should instead be taken to a mor dangerous location instead.

Also Caredig i Natur’s refusal to clarify what we established almost immediately i s downright confusing people: That the path in question is NOT a dedicated cycle path, but is an unsegregated shared use cycle path and pedestrian footway. You cannot enforce the cycle path because pedestrians (who constitute 95% of traffic on the path) have every right to be there.

Caredig i Natur is the problem here. In refusing to post up the clarifications on this point, and refusing to edit or delete their article, they are perpetuating misinformation for their own ends. This is extremely dishonest of them.

    One Response to “Caredig i Natur and Dishonest Reporting”

    1. on 24 Nov 2011 at 4:56 pmrenewable

      You might want to take take another look: they just deleted the comment from their page that says they closed comments.

    Leave a Reply