Pulitzer Prize-winning author and syndicated conservative columnist George F. Will penned a column for Newsweek a few days ago that got cycling advocates into an uproar…in the column, Will sets out to bash U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood and includes a glaring factual error:
Where to start? Does LaHood really think Americans were not avid drivers before a government highway program “promoted” driving? Does he think 0.01 percent of Americans will ever regularly bike to work? Intercity high-speed rail probably always will be the wave of the future, for cities more than 300 miles apart. And as for Portland …
Read Will’s full column by clicking here.
Perhaps Will used the “0.01 percent” figure as artistic embellishment, but a variety of outlets took him to task for it.
Treehugger beats him up with statistics…
D.C.’s “The Wash Cycle” gives him some of the business…
And, perhaps most eloquently, associate editor of The Atlantic Monthly Matthew Yglesias tries diligently to set Will straight…
Shooting off at the hip without facts as backup has become a popular technique of late for many conservative writers and radio personalities — but what the above misguided statement really illustrates is that people who choose bicycling as a viable transportation mode have a LONG WAY to go to achieve understanding in the United States. There are thousands of us out there, but we’re still so easily marginalized by comments/wisecracks like Will’s.
What’s your take on these comments?
Popularity: 11% [?]
George Will is wrong about most things and has no standing in the world known as reality. I have already emailed him the links to the facts as opposed to his made-up ‘facts’. But this is his whole MO…he’s just not used to being fact checked.
George Will recently wrote a column in which he claimed he doesn’t own a pair of jeans. Anyone like that is so isolated from the real world that riding a bike to work in incomprehensible to him. I would guess that he’s not been behind the wheel of a car for years, either. Limos and taxis for ol’ Georgie.
George just needs a pair of these:
http://www.onestopplus.com/1/1/1424-s-t-r-e-t-c-h-denim-bike-shorts-by-denim-24-7-plus-size-womens.html
…and he’ll be right with the world once again.
Could you please post a link to the entire article by George Will so I can read it in context? I don’t understand his comment based on what you posted. Thanks!
“Shooting off at the hip without facts as backup is always a popular technique of late for many writers and radio personalities…”
Fixed that for you.
OK, I found the article online and read it all the way through. His point was that the government shouldn’t be dictating how people live their lives, including how they get around. Since it’s an opinion column, he is not required to get all the stats straight, only to get his point across. The “stat” that everyone is so upset about was just an exaggeration. Even I saw that, and was not offended. And this “technique” is used by both conservative and liberal commentators. Let’s not get caught up in semantics here and look at the big picture of what Will is trying to say, whether you agree with his opinions or not.
Ooops, I meant to add a link to Will’s column in the article. Sorry ’bout that!
@Wayne – right you are. My comment about that comes from a conversation I had at work with a self-described conservative who decried the growing lack of accuracy among his favorite columnists (including Will).
@Sara — several others have chalked up the stat as exaggeration (I mentioned that possibility, didn’t I?), but the point is that once again, folks who don’t choose to drive cars are marginalized. It’s not about being offended…it’s about not being taken seriously — more of a bummer than an anger-generator.
Okay, Jack, just why did you know the URL for a plus-sized women’s clothes store? I’ve seen pics of your wife, and she’s little. You’re too Tyler Hamiltonesque to wear a size 12, if you had drag tendencies(although I’ve never seen a drag queen with mutton chops). Do tell, bro. Do tell……
I was actually looking for those denim cycling shorts that were popular in the early 90s…I thought I could find a photo of Cipollini in them (they were vaguely popular with Italian pro racers). I hit on that plus-size site and knew I’d struck gold, though!
Will George isn’t the only one who needs to be set straight, check out this pissed off excuse of a so called “woman” here in Austin who, HORRORS of HORRORS!! got a bike lane striped in front of her CAVE…
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/05/11/0511stone_edit.html
[...] May 22nd, 2009 by Jack “Ghost Rider” Sweeney ยท 1 Comment [...]
GW doesn’t want to see bike and alternative transportation options subsidized by government but doesn’t seem to have much to say about subsidies for highways, road, bridges, etc. It’s all subsidized. Many cities are debating with the private sector on whether or not development should shoulder more of the burden and pay for the cost of it’s growth through impact fees. Would GW support the elimination of those subsidies? If it threatens the individual’s right to car ownership, I think not. Funny, that I have never felt that anyone was trying to take away my car. Just the opposite. I’ve felt that in most places that I’ve lived car ownership was a manditory regardless of whether or not one’s income was sufficient to own a car, pay rent or a mortgage, buy food, save for retirement, or take an occasional vacation. I see new urbanism and smart growth strategies not as government trying to usurp my freedom but as facilitating the best use of public and private monies. Our one car, necessary where we live for several months out of the year due to inadequate public transit, is a financial ball and chain, one that my husband and I would readily relinquish given options.
Karen, excellent points!
OK, so I read Will’s article. Eh. No biggie. He’s playing to his crowd there. I think the “0.01%” crack was just that- a wisenheimer quote because he didn’t want to bother to look up the real statistics that might prove him wrong. Overall, there was a tone of desparation in the work that tells me he knows he’s fighting a losing battle.
Maybe someone ought to buy that boy a bike.
Incidentally, I do wonder if Mr. Will “mis-typed”. I wonder if his “0.01%” (one hundredth of one percent) was really supposed to be simply 1%? It’s very easy to do that with typed percentages.
And quite frankly, I’d say 1% is pretty good when it comes to bicycle commuters nation wide.
Chip, that possibility was explored in one of the various “debunking” articles I read about Will’s column. I still have my doubts…
Will: “Does LaHood really think Americans were not avid drivers before a government highway program ‘promoted’ driving?”
Well, they weren’t, so if LaHood thinks that, he’s right.
U.S. government policies favoring automobile use date back to the 1920s — which, not so coincidentally, is the decade when public transit began to decline in earnest due to competition from the automobile. Even so, the period of mass automobile ownership did not begin until after World War II, when government policies at all levels were bent toward increasing automobile use both directly (through increasing subsidies of automobile transport) and indirectly (FHA/VA lending policies that forced most people who wanted to buy a house to buy in car-oriented suburbs, and that permitted the odious practice of redlining to decimate central cities).
The idea that Americans drive cars because we want to is stupid today, and more generally, it betrays a lack of historical perspective.