Don’t Judge Canada: Velo-City Global 2012 Vancouver 65

I thought exactly the same when I saw it, James.

We have a local conference here – The Asia-Pacific Cycle Congress.

Note how the logo for the conference is a bicycle helmet! Australia has a low way to go!

Yes, there is an interesting contrast between the Seville and Vancouver videos. The Vancouver video shows people ‘biking’, whereas the Spanish video shows lots of people getting around on bikes. Not quite the same thing.

I live in Spain and I can confirm that if Spanish women were obliged to mess up their hair everyday by wearing a helmet then 99.9% would abandon biking forever.

Also, written a better website for them…..is this 2001?

It would have been more informative for the readers of this blog if the author had chosen to contact the conference organizers for some background on the video and taken a closer look at the people in the video. Like many sensible cyclists in general, and in the video, Skip dressed appropriately for a full day of cycling all over town on a winter day. Sad to see a cycling commentator falling into the same trap as the rest of society, by judging people and their lifestyle choices by their clothing.

Chris Keam
(Please note I am a member of the organizing committee for Velo-city 2012)

As another Vancouverite, I agree with some things both Chris AND Cecily are saying… But isn’t the point, right now, just to get more people out on bikes, 7 days a week, 12 months of the year? I don’t know if time should be taken to put down another cyclists who are out riding, when we are trying to up the numbers? I see great varieties of dress everyday – there is no real rule on dress as remember, this is Vancouver!, but to me, what people wear is second (or even 3rd or 4th) down on the list from just seeing other cyclists out riding. I’m not sure we are at a point where we have the luxury to care about what people wear, lets just get people out on bikes.

PaddyAnne, you make a great point. We should care more about getting more people out on bikes. And that’s exactly why I’m pointing out the flaws in this video from a marketing perspective.

You want to market bicycling as something easy to do. Something that doesn’t require you to go out and spend $500 a MEC just to fit in. You should be able to hop on a bike in the exact same clothes you would be wearing if you were walking, taking transit, or perhaps even driving.

That’s where this video has gone wrong. It is reinforcing the perception that you *need* all of this equipment just to ride a bicycle to work.

I’m not criticizing these people’s decision to wear what they wear. I’m criticizing the way Vancouver is *selling* bicycling to the thousands of people who are so close to crossing over from driving a car or taking transit, to using a bicycle. I’m saying that this video will not do a single thing to encourage that person to start riding a bike.

James:

The primary audience for Velo-city Global 2012 are already cyclists. The biggest share of the attendees are the politicians and planners who make decisions regarding cycling infrastructure. That’s why those aspects of Vancouver’s cycling environment were given prominence in the video. As I mentioned in my earlier post, it would have been great if you had been in touch with the organizing committee before publishing the article, as I think you’ve viewed the video with an incorrect assumption regarding the audience and the intended message. It would have been great to address your comments and concerns in the more traditional journalistic tradition where the group being criticized has a chance to respond to concerns and dispel any misconceptions before publishing.

You are of course entitled to your opinion and it’s your blog to present however you see fit, but when I watch the video I see people of both genders wearing a wide variety of clothes, including the mayor in business attire, women and men in regular clothes, and of course people in the rainwear of their choice… on a rainy day. In short, what you are seeing is a cross-section of typical Vancouver cyclists, rather than an attempt to promote one style of cycling attire over any other. I think trying to compartmentalize cyclists into fashion boxes is counter-productive in the long run. As an example, while I often cycle in my regular clothes now, when I had to pull a trailer across town to drop off a toddler at daycare before hustling my butt to get to work on time a few years back, riding in my office clothes would have been far more uncomfortable and done little to make it enjoyable, whereas doing so in ‘biking’ gear made complete sense.

Having been a cyclist on the West Coast for over 40 years, from delivering papers in soaking wet poly-cotton jeans as a youth, to a daily 20km commute in typical biking rain gear, I would suggest that year-round cyclists here are quite capable of deciding for themselves what is the best choice for their circumstances. What you see in the video is a reflection of those personal choices.

Unfortunately, viewing the video as an attempt to get more people cycling fashionably, rather than discerning its real purpose (to encourage potential delegates that attending the conference will deliver real-world solutions to the biggest issues that they face in designing safer cycling cities)is a bit like complaining that Newsworld isn’t Fashion Television, to use a Canadian media analogy.

cheers,

Chris K.

Chris,

Regardless of the audience of the conference, my goal would still be to inspire others to pick up a bicycle with minimal effort/gear and inspire them to occupy the great new bicycle paths and bike lanes that Vancouver has installed. But this was certainly an opinion piece and I’m expressing my opinion about how I feel bicycling should be marketed.

The less barriers there are, the easier it is for the average person to start using a bicycle. As an example, I encourage people to use bicycles with chain covers and internal components simply because a rusty chain can be a barrier to using your bicycle for transportation because it’s a pain to maintain – especially in the winter.

I only have to oil my chain once a year. It’s quite liberating.

A long time ago I was just like most of the people in the film. I thought I needed all sorts of gear to ride, but I have learned over the years that I was just overcomplicating it due to all the pressure that I was exposed to. And overcomplicating it made it less likely that I would take my bike for short trips.

Also, I can assure you that I’m the farthest from someone who promotes fashion. I encourage people to dress for their destination – whatever those clothes might be. I wear business casual clothing to my clients, and I wear jeans + button shirt to my office.

Regarding your analogy, what if I told you that the best way to improve bicycling would be to get more regular people in regular clothes on bicycles? What if that were the single most effective solution to improving conditions for bicyclists? More effective than anything that any delegate at your conference would be capable of? If your video can directly influence that, would it then be worthwhile to use a different angle next time around?

That’s where I’m coming from, but of course you don’t have to agree with it.

Cheers,
James

Chris, clearly we have different views on how best to market the conference – which is fine – I love hearing different perspectives and I’m very open-minded.

However, all other arguments aside, I will say that I was very inspired by Copenhagen’s Velo-City 2010 video, and Seville’s Velo-City 2011 video. I wish I could say the same about Vancouver’s, but I can’t. I think that’s the simplest way to describe my disappointment with the film.

Thanks a lot for the link James!
Like always a well written piece!

I do believe it is the marketing aspect that’s the issue.

If I were starting out now with the different marketing videos, I’d be more hesitant to hop on a bike.
Believing I need to wear special clothes or a helmet would make me think twice.
Even when I thought of moving to BC in the past I started to question if I would continue to ride a bike.

As with most, ultimately I don’t care what people wear. It’s how it’s marketed.

Here is a picture I added to my favourites on Flickr a while ago, which IMO could be a great marketing image that includes ALL cyclists:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rllayman/4770615867/in/faves-ryanz4/

At Bike Hugger, we were WTF we want, when we want. Why as a niche community we divide ourselves further into sub niches as if one niche is better than another only serves to keep us a niche. Show up dressed like Mario Cipollini with a Euro Mullet or with a fixed gear and u-lock or in Levi’s new jeans jacket. I’d rolled right into this conference one day in a white Assos kit and the next in manpris with sandles and definitely despite the CycleChic Manifesto in a helmet too.

@ Chris Keam. What you apparently don’t understand about James Schwartz’s criticism of the Velo City 2012 organising committee’s video is that he’s not making some kind of fashion criticism. He’s taking the video to task for depicting cycling as a dangerous activity. And for implicitly for contradicting Vancouver’s stated aim of increasing cycling rates.

Despite your statement that you see “people of both genders wearing a wide variety of clothes, including the mayor in business attire, women and men in regular clothes,” the outside layer of clothing worn by nearly everyone in this video is “special cycling clothing.” Often it’s of a anti-aesthetic, high visibility design that bespeaks an an extreme concern about visibility – ie a safety concern. I doubt these people would walk down the street wearing such outfits.

As for the mayor, did he really have to appear wearing a garish safety vest AND a helmet in order to talk about his bicycle policy? With that getup, the mayor looked like he must be terrified to be riding a bicycle in his own city.

The Velo City 2012 promo video suggests that, despite Vancouver’s investment in cycling infrastructure to enhance safety, cycling in your city remains a very dangerous activity, where wearing “special cycling gear” designed to minimise that danger is the norm. With a message like this, you are, no matter to whom you are addressing yourself, adding to a flow of messages that prevent people who don’t cycle from taking it up, preventing the development of true safety – in numbers.

Separate from Schwartz’s comments, I have another range of concerns about the video – mostly from a question of style. I question the wisdom of the choice of ‘tough-guy’ vocal inflection chosen by the presenter and more or less successfully imitated by others in the video in appealing to a largely European and South American audience. I thought the pedantic explanation of basic bicycling infrastructure, combined with gushing statements such as “Isn’t that cool?,” was misplaced when aiming at an audience very familiar with such concepts. One more point: I guess people in Vancouver are very proud that the Olympics took place there, but really! It will have been two years when Velo-City happens. Do you really think these people will care?

I read with amusement your comment that “Skip dressed appropriately for a full day of cycling all over town on a winter day.” When I go cycling in winter, I might wear long johns under my trousers, heavier gloves, a scarf and a hat covering my ears. I don’t ride wearing clothes that would look out of place walking down the street. Is that, to you, inappropriate? I really don’t see how wearing those strange shorts Skip was wearing is appropriate winter wear. I think it looked silly.

Lastly, your repeated comment you made about how you would have preferred that Schwartz contacted the organisers is based on your mistaken assumption that a blogger acts as a traditional journalist. The video is publicly available. was shown in public and is on the internet. What Schwartz did is make public his reaction as someone interested in all aspects of cycling to the publicly available video. Furthermore, the video speaks for itself. A film reviewer doesn’t call up the producer and director before reviewing their production.

For the organizers of Velo-City Global 2012, this video of David Suzuki and his daughter in Copenhagen from 2008 is very telling (and inspiring): http://vimeo.com/3760697

Suzuki’s daughter makes an interesting comment about Vancouver bicycle culture: “If I wore these outfits on my bike in Vancouver. Oh man. People would think I was nuts”.

I think there is a lesson there, and I think there is a lot we can learn from Copenhagen. Just some more food for thought…

Chris, once again, I am not judging anyone for what they choose to wear, nor am I asking people to “submit to a cult-like mentality” where I somehow force people to make a fashion statement or even a political statement. Riding your bicycle is enough of a political statement, regardless of what you are wearing.

There is one consistent theme that I have brought up both in the article and in the comments, and I can assure you that my intention is *not* to alienate people who choose to wear extensive bicycle clothing or gear.

The consistent point I have been making is that I believe it is easier to “sell” bicycling and inspire people to use a bicycle in the city by not reinforcing the common belief that you need extensive gear in order to use a bicycle for transportation.

The Velo-City committee had an opportunity to either reinforce that belief, or consciously try to reassure people that all of the specialized gear is not necessary in order to use a bicycle for transportation – especially for short trips.

The host and interview subjects in the video did not do anything to dispel the myth that extensive bicycle gear is required in order to take on using a bicycle.

To be clear, I am not saying that there is *anything wrong with people choosing to wear this gear*. But a couple interviews with a student, or a businessperson or a delivery worker in regular clothes on a bicycle would have made this video very effective in connecting with regular people.

I’m not saying you should have scouted out a fashion show and only showed people wearing fashionable clothing. I’m talking about people in regular “walking clothes” who are pedalling a bicycle.

And by all means, interview a couple people who have all the gear too. Show a wide variety of Vancouverites to give people a great perspective about the diversity of bicyclists in the city.

I didn’t write this article to divide people who are already out there riding bicycles. I wrote this article to try to dispel the belief that extensive clothing and gear is a necessity in order to make the switch to using a bicycle. That’s it.

James:

The purpose of the video was to introduce the delegates at the Seville conference to the key features that make the Vancouver 2012 conference a worthwhile experience for them. The feedback we’ve received from a wide range of potential attendees and active transportation experts was that Vancouver’s significant strides in infrastructure, our adoption of multi-modal transportation schemes, and the city’s reputation as a great place to visit would be the best features to highlight in that regard. Naturally, we took that advice and tailored our video to appeal to the knowledgeable people who we are inviting to come to the conference, share their expertise, and examine Vancouver’s successes in building mode share through infrastructure improvements, advocacy, and education. Will cycling chic come up as a topic of discussion during the conference? I would be surprised if it didn’t. Is it necessary to promote cycling in ‘regular’ clothing to this audience. Probably not. In fact, it would be overstating the obvious, especially to the European delegates who absorbed this reality long ago. As an organization, our goal is to promote the conference as a place to share the solutions that have the biggest impact in encouraging cycling. At this point, the global experience points to my previously mentioned factors (infrastructure, advocacy, and education) as the key pieces of that puzzle. I support your contention that cycling is generally an activity that can be done in whatever clothing one chooses to wear. It’s not necessary to make that point to the primary audience for this video however, and while you clearly don’t see it that way, that point is aptly made by the many cyclists in the video who are wearing non-cycling specific clothing. The fact that many are wearing helmets in a city where it is the law and punishable by a $100 fine (I earlier said $120 from memory, my mistake) and wearing their choice of jacket in the middle of February seems an unfair criticism if you are going to compare our video with one shot under totally different circumstances. Importantly, it’s worthwhile to note that Seville’s mode share and Vancouver’s are not that far apart, and in fact, there are neighbourhoods in our city that exceed the Seville average. Those statistics are a testament to the success Vancouver has had in giving people the impetus to try cycling. Living one block from one of our most well-used bike routes (10th Ave) I see a daily stream of cyclists wearing all kinds of clothing. Many are wearing cycling specific duds, for whatever reason they might have. I’d rather not presume to tell them what to wear, as I assume they are capable of making the best choice for their own needs. Must they consider themselves beholden to act as ambassadors for cycling culture by wearing a certain type of clothes? I don’t think so.

We had spokespeople in every variety of clothing from business suit and hi-viz vest, to basic black from head to toe. I feel that if we had made the video you envision, we’d simply be trading one set of artificial clothing restrictions for another. I’d prefer we didn’t act as the style police and concentrated on the bigger issues that we face. I have every confidence that there are other groups and publications taking the message you’re promoting and ensuring they get to the right people.

best wishes,

Chris

I think we’re running into a cultural gap about what qualifies as “ordinary clothes.” In my experience – aside from the mayor with the safety vest – Vancouverites (and westerners more generally) dress pretty much as shown in the video. Cyclists, pedestrians, transit users, drivers…sporty coats are common and usually considered appropriate for most circumstances. The host in particular, looked like any random person I might expect to pull of the street.

As for the helmets, given the sad state of BC law, I don’t think that can be considered a production decision. Removing them when not riding might have improved image, but would have damaged flow in the video.

Naturally, if you film in February, people are wearing gloves and water/windproof coats. Comfort is good, wet and cold is uncomfortable. Many non-cyclists in this part of the world have very similar clothing in their closets…maybe not the reflective striping, but bright colours are quite common. Film in the summer, and clothing choices change.

What happens when you go taking pictures of Toronto cyclists in February?

I’ve been finding a big snobbery amongst people who seem to think that the only “citizen cyclist” is a fashion cyclist. That’s simply not the case.

Neil, you ask about Toronto cyclists in February?
Living on the other side of the lake from Toronto in what is still deemed a blue-collar automotive town, most dress quite casually while cycling…

Here is a sample of what cyclists wear in St.Catharines during our coldest months; January & February:
http://flic.kr/p/9jbdr7
http://flic.kr/p/9j83F2
http://flic.kr/p/98TNMY
http://flic.kr/p/9aq9kg
http://flic.kr/p/9fdey3
http://flic.kr/p/983GXz
http://flic.kr/p/9jbbf7
http://flic.kr/p/9makJt
http://flic.kr/p/9rbQu7
http://flic.kr/p/9jbb8S

And yes, we even have those in ‘special cycle gear’, all be it limited, and at the end of March:
http://flic.kr/p/9un91j

As for the snobbery? It works both ways.
When I started cycling 7 years ago, those in special cycle gear dominated the streets.
I constantly received comments and dirty looks simply because I was wearing ‘everyday’ clothes (and no helmet).

Now with more people riding in casual clothes and sans helmet, I do feel there is a divide between the two groups. The good is that people simply mind their own business now.
Of course this isn’t to say we don’t “come together” on matters surrounding bike lanes, parking etc.

Many men speaking here, based on the names here. As a Vancouverite, and ex-Toronto cyclist and resident there for over 10 yrs.( I knew the cycling scene there also.):

Here was myself in Copenhagen last year for a few days, pic and my experience as a cyclist:
http://thirdwavecyclingblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/losing-my-cycling-identity-in-the-world%e2%80%99s-cycling-nirvana-copenhagen/

Yes, I was there helmet and all. I’m sorry, it’s just habit and my comfort level. I do like feeling more anonymous with a helmet on anyway. I did fall twice on black ice in Vancouver from the bike.

There are some people, like myself who also just want to save the wear and tear of their street clothing. Besides Vancouver has hills, unlike flat Copenhagen and alot more than Toronto. You won’t find me in high heels, ordinary dress or suit simply because maybe I just can’t afford to replace such shoes and clothing often anymore.

Let’s move on from the cycling clothing debate and be inclusive for all cyclists. While we talk of clothing, millions, if not billions of dollars worth of road infrastructure world-wide, are being planned and built NOW, not always with cyclists in mind.

I cringe as we talk about merits of what is suitable video-wise for….”cycling clothing” while in the corporate meeting rooms, the mega engineering firms are hammering out their big engineering contracts.

Go to where the big fish are to work out bigger issues. .

Cheers.

MikeG:

I’m not attacking the messenger or the message. I agree with James on many counts. I am disputing his contention that a video intended for a specific, expert audience for a specific purpose, should muddy its message by tackling a different topic and targeting the general public. An apt analogy would be to suggest one should take issue with the stock quotes section of the newspaper because it isn’t doing a photo spread on Kate Middleton’s wedding dress.

Ryan:
That Velo-city ad is for a museum exhibition that was held here in Vancouver a couple of years ago.
Its premise was a history of cycling in Vancouver and it featured as diverse an array of bikes and cyclists as you are ever likely to find. It was solid proof that Vancouver is a cycling city, even if some of us dare to wear hi-viz and helmets on occasion.

Mike:
The ECF has a helmet policy. You probably already know about it but it can be found here: http://www.ecf.com/3500_1

Personally, I’m glad they’re coming to Vancouver, so we can have a healthy debate about helmets. I think this is a great place to have that conversation because I think the ECF has a very sensible position on the topic and it makes perfect sense to advocate against mandatory helmet laws in a jurisdiction where they are in place, rather than push for solutions in cities where there isn’t a problem.

“Safety comes from controlling automobiles and creating safe cycling spaces, not from forcing someone to wear a foam hat.”

Couldn’t agree more. Our promotional message repeatedly stated the first two points. In the limited time frame available we focused on Vancouver’s successes to highlight the solutions we can share. I hope the helmet debate gets lots of attention during Velo-city 2012. I imagine it will be a worthwhile discussion. I hope many of you will come and bring your perspectives on the wide variety of cycling issues with you.

cheers,

CK

Jean, thanks for the perspective. It’s much appreciated.

On this website, I have long been addressing all of the “big fish” items that you have identified relating to infrastructure, and I don’t plan on discontinuing that.

However, a very important way to get more people out on bicycles is to show them that it’s not as dangerous as they perceive it to be. That’s why I think marketing bicycles is just as important as anything else to getting more people out on bicycles. The more people out there, the easier it will be to get better and more infrastructure.

For every million hours of travel in North America, there are 0.41 fatalities on a bicycle. In a car, there are 0.46 fatalities. It’s a similar statistic for being admitted into the hospital for a head injury.

But we don’t show videos of people in cars wearing helmets and specialized safety gear. Driving is marketed as a pleasant experience – something that you can do in your regular clothes without a helmet.

There’s a lesson for us who are creating content promoting bicycling.

“If the video was only previewed at the Seville conference, and not available publicly on YouTube, then it would be a different story.”

That’s a weak rationalization. Lots of things are on Youtube that don’t cover every single aspect of a topic and are repurposed from their original intent. As we move forward in our promotions, there will undoubtedly be images of cyclists more to your liking. Describing this small part of our promotions as a ‘disaster of a film’ is overstating the case.

Suggesting “Promoting your city as a great cycling city requires highlighting people who are using bicycles in their regular clothes.” is pure speculation. Great cycling cities work first to create safe cycling spaces. The Fashion Police can come later.

Your video of New York features all kinds of people in all kinds of clothing, some helmeted, some without. This is a video where you’ve cherry-picked the shots you want to use. Our video has various cyclists in the background as our spokesperson explains Vancouver’s cycling infrastructure, but there’s really not much difference in attire in either video. The only difference is that we had comments by some of the key decision-makers who support cycling in Vancouver. We didn’t tell them what to wear. They are capable of dressing themselves in whatever clothes they feel comfortable cycling. So, let’s return to New York and see what their key decision-maker wears when it times to portray their cycling style. This is an image of Janette Sadik-Khan, a woman who many regard as instrumental in New York’s bike-friendly progress. The source is one of your fellow Toronto bloggers. Note the helmet and bright orange jacket. Note the weather conditions.

http://bikingtoronto.com/duncan/why-you-should-know-who-janette-sadik-khan-is/

Clearly there’s plenty of ways to dress when riding. Expecting one and all to promote your aesthetic is just as arbitrary as demanding everybody buy a maillot jaune and bib knickers so they can look like ‘real’ cyclists.

@Chris Keam

You continue to take a position where you try to deflect James’ criticism (and that of those who agree with him) by almost obtusely misunderstanding or misconstruing it. You do so with some really questionable statements. I’ll go through some of them.

Chris Keam in quote marks

“That’s a weak rationalisation.”

That’s pretty strong language. In your own tone, then – that’s a pretty lame defence. Bottom line is this: the video was available, and we have expressed our points of view on it. We have a perfect right to do so no matter how it was made, why it was made, or whom it was made for. You still think the video is defensible as a video depicting cycling in Vancouver. I don’t like it, for myself, but am willing to accept it if people actually dress that way when they’re off their bicycles in Vancouver. If they’re wearing those clothes only because they are going cycling, then including only such people in the video perpetuates a negative message about cycling – to wit, “cycling is dangerous and you have to wear high-visibility, messenger style gear to survive.”

“This is a video where you’ve cherry-picked the shots you want to use.”

I’m sorry, but isn’t that exactly what all video producers do? How is this a valid criticism? Why would you want to criticise James’ video just to defend your own?

“we had comments by some of the key decision-makers who support cycling in Vancouver. . We didn’t tell them what to wear.”

Well, I’ll accept that the mayor’s public affairs people are responsible for how he appeared on camera. Jack Becker fits your criterion. Peter Judd does, but he along eschewed safety-wear. The rest: Skip, Stepan, Stuart, Amber, Bob Paddon (who didn’t actually say much of interest on camera) – those you cherry-picked for inclusion. Not as much of a difference as you pretend.

“if a film reviewer criticized a science documentary because it lacked the elements of a Hollywood romantic comedy”
“one should take issue with the stock quotes section of the newspaper because it isn’t doing a photo spread on Kate Middleton’s wedding dress.”

Your comment would work if your analogies did. They don’t. In this case, let me posit instead that your hypothetical science documentary is giving credence to creationism – like “cycling is dangerous” another mistaken belief. I don’t think in that case there would need to be communication and clarification before rendering judgment. Nothing you’ve written has changed my mind about this video. However, what Neil and Cecily said actually gave me pause. If they’re right, then the criticism would revert to suggesting that the video might have explained that Vancouver has a different aesthetic.

“I am disputing his contention that a video intended for a specific, expert audience for a specific purpose, should muddy its message by tackling a different topic and targeting the general public”

I don’t see how including images of people who don’t cycle in “cycling clothes” would have muddied your message. Does Peter Judd muddy the video’s message? How about a shot of him cycling as he was dressed? How about using someone in regular clothes as one of the video’s “Cycling Enthusiasts? No one was asking the video to tackle a different message or address a different audience. I still criticise the style of delivery to camera – it bring to mind that idiot with the zany suits on Hockey Night in Canada. I also thought the video could have reined in the goofy enthusiasm – “isn’t that cool?” “You got that right!”. Why didn’t the video just have them come out and say how “neat” it all was?

MikeG:
“”This is a video where you’ve cherry-picked the shots you want to use.”

I’m sorry, but isn’t that exactly what all video producers do? How is this a valid criticism? Why would you want to criticise James’ video just to defend your own?”

My point is that James chose the people he wanted to highlight in his choice of clips. We didn’t choose the people in the background of our spokesperson’s clips. There’s a difference in process, although, as I’ve pointed out, not much difference in actual apparel. James chose to use his video to highlight New York cyclists. I didn’t see much difference in their clothes from the Vancouver riders in our video.

As for provincialism, now we’re getting beyond discussing the issues and moving towards shooting the messenger. James is suggesting Toronto has a different fashion sense when riding. That’s cool. I’m suggesting we’re pretty capable of dressing appropriately for Vancouver conditions out here on the Wet Coast.

The bottom line is that I personally feel that James criticisms are misplaced. When I look at the video I see many cyclists in regular clothes. Do we dress differently in Vancouver than Toronto. Maybe. Who cares? We ride. Toronot rides. People make a choice to wear high viz or not. These are individual decisions.

I have no issue with people disliking the video if it doesn’t suit their tastes. I do feel that some of the assumptions made about it are bewildering. There are people wearing everyday clothes riding bikes, including some of our interviewees. We chose to highlight infrastructure, which is the key issues facing our potential delegates. We didn’t touch on helmets, clothing, and a host of other issues that advocates deal with, from driver hostility and cycling scofflaws, to end of trip facilities and cycling education. I expect all those topics would make for great videos, but we made the video that met our purpose, our budget, and our time frame. We’re satisfied with the result and welcome both criticisms and the opportunity to respond to those observations. I thank James for the opportunity to have a spirited discussion on the topic.

best wishes,

Chris

Wow, there sure is a lot of concern about clothes! I have to tell you, that clothes are the least of most people’s worries when they think about cycling. They are terrified for their lives. Yes, its not really that bad, but this is the way non-cyclists think. I think its a luxury to worry about clothes and image – it means that you already have an excellent set of cycling facilities that enable bike use. Different cities and terrain can dictate different clothing choices. If I’m going on a 10+ mile commute (one way) I am likely to dress differently than if I’m only riding a mile or so. If a city is hilly vs. flat, hot vs. cold, etc, etc.

@Ilovemyraincoat,

Say I was producing a commercial to promote an automobile brand (and thus promote driving), and I had two families auditioning for the commercial. The first is a family dressed up in driving helmets and full fire-proof suits. The second family is a family wearing their regular clothes (whatever those clothes might be). If I want to sell my automobile and encourage people to drive my car, I’m pretty sure I would choose the family in their regular clothes, because that’s the family that people can relate to.

That doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with the family that chooses to wear fire suits and helmets. That’s great that they are choosing to wear these clothing items to increase their safety. But the risk of driving an automobile doesn’t warrant all of that gear, so why would I want to lead my viewers on to believe that this safety gear is necessary through my commercial?

That’s the point that several people here seem to miss. It’s about marketing bicycling as something that is easy to pick up.

James, thanks for the great blog post and thanks to all commenters for the really engaged discussion. Lots of wonderful nuances to cover in some future FAQ.

I was very encouraged to see Chris Keam say he hoped Velo-City might throw the spotlight on the counter-productive unscientific oddity that is the BC adult hat law.

Henry (and anyone else: Cecily, Ryan, M, MikeG, Neil?) – get in touch about that better video. That’s the second time the idea’s come up, so we should see what skills we’ve got.

I’d also be keen to brainstorm legal routes to hat-free cycling in this sunny summer city, specifically on the much-hoped-for bikeshare. Maybe CoV bylaw amendments, by designating boulevards, painted lanes, segregated lanes and the seawall as ‘paths or ways’? Or the religious exemption loophole.

A good bit of planning, and a well-marketed campaign next summer, might help make cycling (heaven forbid) a normal way to move in the Greenest City!

James,

Given that I’ve read and enjoyed a great deal of your stuff, I find your tone of condescension here sort of disappointing. Taking the position that I’m somehow not advanced enough to understand what you’re saying strikes me as a handy way to simply dismiss me. But there’s another possible explanation that perhaps you’re missing. Maybe I’m not completely dull and maybe I do, in fact, see what you’re getting at. It could be that I just don’t entirely agree with you.

It’s entirely plausible that the filmmakers might have appealed to a broader audience to start bike commuting by including more people in so-called regular clothes, but I fear many of those new adoptees would quickly fall by the wayside unless they were willing to dress themselves in some weather-appropriate clothing. For lots of people, the commitment to continue that bike commute day after day can be fostered by getting some good, basic rainwear – whether cycling-specific or not – in order to make their ride more enjoyable.

Judging by your previously posted tips for riding in the rain, I’d say our strategies for dealing with the rain aren’t altogether different. The main difference is we live in different climates. Where I live, the weather is much more similar to Vancouver than to Toronto, and we see rain day after day for several months of the year. So not only do I carry rain gear every day, during those rainy winter months, I actually start my commute every day wearing that rain gear. Because even if it’s not raining at that moment, it very likely will have by the time I’ve reached my destination, which, by the way is considerably closer than 30km from home.

What I mean to say is sure it’s important, from a PR standpoint, to make bikes appealing to a broad array of people, but I also think there’s a PR benefit to be gained from trying to shift public attitudes and lessen the self-consciousness and stigma that accompanies some of the more cycling-specific clothing. In other words, you say it’s not regular. I say, maybe it is. Or, if not, it could be.

James,

I really don’t believe you’re out to heap scorn on people in yellow raincoats, but that scorn does exist and I certainly think it’s worth considering the larger effects of it. Even if you do diligently refrain from explicitly judging, there are plenty of judgmental, scornful types out there reading along and finding fuel for their self-satisfied scornfulness.

On some level, it hearkens back to adolescence when the cool kids were openly disdainful of – I don’t know – kids who wore their backpacks with the straps on both shoulders and even used them to carry books.

I do think your articles show a certain bias, but I don’t mean that in a necessarily nasty or derogatory way. You simply have a strong opinion and you’re trying to advance it. It’s just that for every strong opinion there’s (not always, but) very often a perfectly reasonable flipside.

And, yes, we are talking about marketing here, but marketing is nothing to be taken lightly. Just as it matters to you that non-yellow jacket wearers are being represented in promotional videos (and they truly could’ve done a better job), it matters to me how yellow jacket wearers are being represented in videos as well as on your blog. The thing is, there seems to be an undertone or implication that cyclists who don’t dress in non-cycling clothes are somehow blighting the cause of cycling, and I guess I think that’s kind of unfair.

It would be interesting to see stats for bicycle commute distances.

It makes little sense to change to cycling clothes for a 5-8 km ride with no major hills. But take a 20km ride each way with a couple of big hills, and suddenly a fast bike, specialized clothes, and a shower at each end make a lot more sense.

I never would have thought that Van Velo City conference organisers could be so thick and dense… to the point of not understanding basic and simple reasoning…
Anyways, while visiting Vancouver (being a montrealer) I never felt safe biking around. I understand why now.
We will be launching our very own Montreal Cycle Chic in a few days (I’m not involved at all). This along with the BIXI effect should hopefully soon propel us in the European bicycle league, crossing fingers.
Vancouverites can continue biking around in full metal jackets armours for all we care… It’s just too bad they got to organise this conference, they will bring down shame and embarrassment on the whole of Canada once more which will take years to dispell.

Special bicycle gear, especially visibility jackets and loads of helmets are a TRUE and SURE sign that the bicycle culture is unhealthy, and totally controlled by one of its sub-cultural bicycle tribes: the sports geeks/roadies.
Who wants to identify to that dorky image? How does that incite anyone to step down from their car and ride a bicycle? Who wants to carry all that junk around in an additional bag and be the one who showers at work, etc. i.e. the only weirdo in the office?
I cannot believe that Vancouver’s bike culture is only composed of white 40 year old males, WTF? And that Amber would be the typical Vancouver biking girl?
There was not one single sit-up bike in the video!!! And do these folks wear these ridiculous yellow jackets on normal days when they are not on their bikes?
And what is up with the stupid not-so-subtle helmet propaganda, can’t they take them of at least to speak to the camera? After Copenhagen and Sevilla are we going to look like morons to the rest of the world, oh boy, what a regression!!!
And how are theses guys going to handle the bike share system when it comes in, huh, like Australia??? Can anyone spell F-A-I-L-U-R-E????
I know plenty of normal folks biking in Vancouver, where are they? No seniors? Where are the hippies and their West coast flair, where are the freaking hipsters on their fixies? The messenger wannabes? No parents cargoing children around? No Asian people in Vancouver WTF?
And do they need to recite their text like John Wayne down from his high horse?
Anyways, pathetic…