In the beloved children’s tale called “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” an

unassuming emperor strutted out naked in front of his adoring subjects because he
believed he wore the most elegant and luxurious finery. His tailor had convinced him into
thinking that the clothing was visible to all but the emperor, and those words seemed to
be reinforced by the hushed and reverent reaction of the crowd. Of course, the citizens
dared not speak because of the power and influence of the wealthy and regal emperor. A
similar story seems to be unfolding within the motorcycle industry and the citizens all
seem to be keeping their lips sealed about it.

Prior to 2004, the Motorcycle Safety Foundation published a Rider Course that
most instructors believed in wholeheartedly and most participants felt adequately
prepared them for motorcycle riding on the street. The state of California adopted the
Rider Course and suddenly it simply changed. Many other states have also instituted this
program without examining it thoroughly. The program has serious flaws that could
potentially lead to motorcyclist deaths and no one is saying a word about it. The MSF has
become like the emperor’s tailor, cunningly marketing its new program as adult-learning
oriented and learner-friendly, and yet some students are passing the course without the
basic skills necessary for surviving on the street.

The fact that the MSF changed its course materials isn’t a big deal. In fact, one
would expect that programs evolve: research uncovers new instructional techniques,
materials become dated and need revising, and instructors need new material to keep the
lessons fresh. However, this does not explain the specific changes made to the
curriculum. A RiderCourse Instructor kit provided to MSF instructors in 2004 excerpted
the following publications, presumably to show its “research-based” foundation: the
MSF’s Motorcycle Task Analysis, referencing McDole and Berger 1971, a Photographic
Analysis of Motorcycle Operator Control Responses based on research conducted in
1976, an article on braking originally printed in 1985, and components of the Hurt Study,
which was conducted in 1981. Motorcycles and equipment have improved significantly
since these studies and there are many more riders now, so why is all the information so
outdated?

Would the MSF change its program because it was too difficult for people to
pass? The old program was more regimented. Each exercise needed to be mastered before
the student proceeded to the next. This meant that a student may be dropped from the
class and would then return to master the skills. In the old program, a student may have
had to retake the course several times to ensure mastery. The MSF was receiving many
complaints from unsatisfied and irate customers who were upset about having to
reschedule. The important thing, however, was that these individuals who did not have
the necessary skills to ride were kept off the road until they were more prepared for the
challenges of real riding. Now, some instructors are saying students are being “pushed
through” the program even though they may not understand the concepts being taught or
have not fully mastered the skills. The new program does not allow an instructor to drop a
student from the class until the rider proves to be a hazard to him/her self or others. Such
a policy allows an unskilled or low skilled rider to complete the entire course regardless
of comprehension.
 Some experts are identifying another problem with the new program: there is no
direction on how to apply the exercises to real situations. Instructors are not permitted to
comment on the possible dangers inherent with the exercises, such as “if you did this on
the street, you could lose control and crash.” The exercises are not built on real world
riding situations and there is no talk about how to apply what one is learning. Can the
average person connect swerving between cones to avoiding debris falling from a
speeding dump truck on the freeway? Instructors are only supposed to read the cards to
the students without addressing possible dangerous or fatal consequences if the
instructions are not followed. It appears that the citizens are not supposed to point out any
flaws, for the emperor and his royal men are too wealthy and influential to be criticized.

Several critics have also noted that the new program embraces an “adult learning”
philosophy, where students teach themselves with group work in the classroom and
everyone is supported and encouraged regardless of whether they understand the point
and purpose of their task. “One size does not fit all,” in royal clothing or in an
educational environment. Some students may need individual instruction or repeatedly
told what to do. The result of failing to learn a concept of motorcycle riding is that an
unprepared rider is being allowed on the street. Such an action puts the motorcyclist in
danger, as well as others on the street. One is permitted 21 points worth of errors and can
still pass. This individual is hardly capable of riding. He or she may not even be capable
of turning out of the dealership without dropping the bike.

Opponents of the new program are claiming it is “dumbed down” and are pointing
to the corporate sponsors of the Motorcycle Safety Foundation as the reason. The MSF is
sponsored by manufacturers and distributors of BMW, Ducati, Harley-Davidson, Honda,
Kawasaki, KTM, Piaggio/Vespa, Suzuki, Triumph, Victory and Yamaha motorcycles.
Oddly enough, these same companies are also members of the Motorcycle Industry
Council. Oddest of all, the Motorcycle Industry Council has the exact same address as the
Motorcycle Safety Foundation: 2 Jenner Street, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92618-3806.
Insiders report that the change in curriculum is due to the fact that the manufacturers and
distributors were complaining that not enough people were buying their motorcycles. The
motorcycle companies allegedly wanted an easier program that would allow people to
pass quickly and immediately purchase their motorcycles. Yet the “new clothes” are
being presented to the emperor as flawless, research-based, and effective. The citizens are
failing to ask questions, and the tailor isn’t volunteering any information.

The instructors, site coordinators and Motorcycle Safety Foundation insiders I

interviewed, informally observed, and contacted all seemed rather fearful of
repercussions from the Motorcycle Safety Foundation. Why? It’s true that the MSF has
connections to the federal government. The jurisdiction of their corporation is, after all, in
Washington, DC. The MSF also has state connections – it is somehow involved or
influential in motorcycle safety programs in every state in the country. The MSF is
intimately connected to many newspapers and magazines due to their commercial
interests. Think about it – when was the last time you read a negative review of one of the
major manufacturers’ motorcycles in a popular motorcycle magazine? They even have
some say in who can receive their motorcycle licenses in many states.

Another reason why nobody is talking about the problems with the new program
might be the money that is invested in it. The Motorcycle Safety Foundation is partially
funded by the Motorcycle Industry Council. Yet it also receives federal money for its
rider education programs. Think about all the money spent on lobbying for laws that help
the motorcycle manufacturers. What about all the money that goes into advertising for
these companies? How about sponsorships, conventions, demonstrations, and events?
Finally, think about the kind of money a site owner makes on one site. One insider
estimates that an owner rakes in about $30,000 a month after expenses. This figure isn’t
hard to believe when you see a site owner driving up on a brand-new motorcycle,
spending leisurely days golfing, or buying a brand-new car for his or her significant other.
This amount of money can certainly keep people quiet, particularly if the MSF is doing
anything wrong in the manner it is establishing sites.

For example, if a site was found to be established illegitimately, and the employee
involved in this unethical transaction was fired, shouldn’t the site be shut down? Yet I’ve
received reports that one of the sites in Southern California was instituted this way and is
still operating very profitably today. This same site was started with bikes confiscated
from another site for “lack of repair” – and the zoning problems of that location were
also remedied as well.

Another example of questionable business practices was reported by the

Motorcycle Riders Foundation on January 28, 2005:

“MSF terminated the contracts for four separate training sites in the San Francisco
area with a two day notice sent over the holiday weekend. The site manager, James
LaBarbera was a vocal critic of the MSF curriculum and their program management. The
California Motorcycle Safety Program (CMSP) program manager Rob Gladden charged
LaBarbera with “serious safety violations” including dead batteries, bald tires and faulty
helmet liners. Further investigation revealed one dead battery on a bike not in use, a “
bald tire” on a motorcycle that a MSF representative refused to examine, and sanitary
paper helmet liners used by medical professionals everyday.”

I tried to get some answers by contacting two important individuals at the

Motorcycle Safety Foundation. First, I contacted Rob Gladden, Project Manager, who
said:

“Please keep in mind that MSF-certified RiderCoaches are free to make comments on
their personal experiences as RiderCoaches and motorcycling enthusiasts but their
comments or statements are not to be taken as a position, statement, or opinion of the
Motorcycle Safety Foundation or the California Motorcyclist Safety Program.”

My questions were then forwarded to Dean Thomson, Director of Communications, who

indicated that they were not able to help me at this time.
“As a matter of business practice, the MSF only considers questions submitted from
reporters or from freelance writers who have been assigned by an editor to write an
article. As part of this process, we request the name of the publication and editor who
assigns the article.”

That sounds to me like censorship. Why the secrecy? Could it be that the MSF has
something to hide? Could it be that the MSF has an important stake in the publications
industry? Does the MSF have the power to control what people say about it? Could the
MSF possibly have something to do with magazine advertising budgets? Think about it –
why haven’t you read anything critical of the Motorcycle Safety Foundation?

Let’s explore what the Motorcycle Safety Foundation is. Its website states that it is a
“national, not-for-profit organization,” and its name indicates it is a foundation. Yet it is
registered as a corporation in the state of California and is officially entitled “Motorcycle
Safety Foundation, Inc.” So is it a non-profit? I searched records online for an annual
report, budget report or annual giving summary for the MSF – to no avail.

The mission of the MSF, as stated on its website, is as follows:

• Developing and maintaining a high quality, comprehensive, research-based Rider

Education and Training System (MSF RETS) and its individual curriculum
products.
• Establishing national trainer and site certification standards and providing
technical assistance for training and licensing programs.
• Promoting model or enabling legislation to create state-funded rider training
programs.
• Actively participating in government relations, research and public
awareness
• Partnering with other motorcycling and public organizations to make the nation's
streets and highways safer for motorcyclists.

What does the MSF actually do? Have you seen their magazine advertisements in a
magazine intended for the general non-motorcycling public? Their campaigns are
supposed to target drivers to educate and inform them about motorcycles. What are these
ads doing in motorcycle magazines? People who read motorcycle magazines don’t need
to be told to watch out for motorcyclists or to share the road. Supposedly there was a
radio campaign as well. Did you hear it? Have you seen MSF billboards or commercials?
How about school education programs? Do the students taking driver’s ed. classes know
about the MSF and its mission?

Well, the MSF was active in Georgia in 2002 when it criticized the administration of the
state motorcycle training program and lobbied to remove the administrator. Its lobbying
partner, the Omni Resource Group, said that the MSF was not interested in running the
motorcycle training program. Funding was reduced to zero dollars and yet the MSF
statement is to create state funded rider training programs.” Yet in 2006, the Georgia
Department of Driver Services website states: “All Instructors have been certified by the
MSF and the Georgia Department of Motor Vehicle Safety. Participants who successfully
complete the MRC:RSS and the ERC receive a special "completion card" from the
Motorcycle Safety Foundation, which may be presented to participating insurance
carriers for possible premium discounts.” It appears that the MSF took over the Georgia
program, just like many of the other state programs.

Another example of the MSF work occurred in California in 2004. The MSF was the
lowest bidder on the state’s motorcycle training program and took over the California
Motorcyclist Safety Program. The MSF published an article on February 23, 2005
boasting “California Motorcyclist Safety Program Posts 26% Gain in Student Training
for 2004 at Significant Savings to Students and State…In 2004, 49,222 students received
hands-on motorcycle training offered through the CMSP, an increase of 26% over the
previous year, in which an estimated 39,000 received training…Administrative budget
savings for the CMSP in 2004, managed by MSF, are estimated at $405,790…
Collectively [students] saved a total of $614,250 in tuition costs alone.” Later that year,
the tuition was raised from $198 to $235. (Students were paying $212 prior to 2004.)
MSF claimed operating costs had risen, opponents claimed the MSF gouged prices.

Other incidents have clearly shown what the tailor’s plan is – and citizens are still looking
the other way. For example, many instructors who did not agree with the new program
were released from duty, and schools that did not want to comply with MSF guidelines
were shut down. The MSF is so adept at engineering public opinion that instructors were
given a survey to assess their thoughts about the new program. However, the survey was
a computer-scored survey with the instructors’ i.d. numbers on it. A person isn’t going to
speak negatively against his or her employer unless the survey is anonymous. Likewise,
the instructors were asked to raise their hands if they disagreed with the new program and
of course, they kept their hands down because they wanted to keep their jobs.

If the MSF ends up operating all the programs in every state, what will become of free
choice and competitive pricing? How will competition ensure that the highest quality
programs are being produced? Are these “proven, research-based” programs making a
difference? “While deaths from automobile accidents in 2005 are only slightly higher
than in 1997, motorcyclist fatalities have increased for eight straight years and more than
doubled over that period,” according to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.

I was unable to locate any current studies which have been conducted to actually
determine the effectiveness of rider education programs, except for one published by
Monash University in Australia in 2000, which included the Motorcycle Safety
Foundation programs. This report concluded “In general, training appears to be
successful in teaching novices to ride. There is no clear evidence that it makes them safer
riders.” Remember there was one child who told the emperor that he was wearing his
birthday suit – it only takes one voice to let others know what’s going on. Just take a look
at the emperor and tell him what you think. His tailor has gone a little too far this time.