There are apparently some methodological problems with that report. I don't know if they are mentioned in the Freakonomics comments. I've been disappointed with the Freaks lately- some of the posts have contained serious, obvious oversights. They seem to be chosen for freak value rather than academic rigor
Long story short - it's not hard to believe that 80% of all collisions involve error on the part of BOTH parties.
Longer story - if a cyclist is riding on a sidewalk against traffic at high speed and shoots into the crosswalk and gets hit, it's the motorist's "fault" but it's still stupid for the cyclist to do that. If a cyclist is riding in the door zone and gets hit, it's the motorist's fault - legally and morally - but it's still avoidable and counter to all good advice. If a cyclist is hugging the curb and a motorist tries to squeeze by, and either misjudges, or the cyclist wobbles, it's absolutely the motorist's "fault", but once again, avoidable.
I guess what I'm saying is that reports like this do cyclists a disservice if they create the impression that cyclists have no reason to operate responsibly, and thus encourage more crazy wrong-way sidewalk riding.