Log in:  

Register

Media amnesia and reactions

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

19 Aug 2013 22:58

red_flanders wrote:Not up to you. You're derailing another thread. Stop or you'll be on vacation since we've had this conversation already this week. Thanks.


Mod thread, now.
User avatar Dr. Maserati
Veteran
 
Posts: 11,437
Joined: 19 Jun 2009 10:31

19 Aug 2013 23:04

Not playing the game. You heard the simple instructions from 2 mods. That's all you'll get from me on the topic. Please move on.
User avatar red_flanders
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,054
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 06:45

19 Aug 2013 23:08

Dr. Maserati wrote:Why?
If there is a rule (or even in forum spirit) I will do so happily.
But the posts I am responding to are fair and within rules.


red_flanders wrote:[color="Blue"]Not up to you.[/color] You're derailing another thread. Stop or you'll be on vacation since we've had this conversation already this week. Thanks.


What rule am I meant to be breaking?

Also - I sure as hell never said it was "up to me" - in fact I have said I am only too happy to abide by the rules. And that is meant to be what they are - rules, and they are not up to you to make up, only to enforce.

If you see fit to allow a post remain that i find questionable, you have no right to decide later that I cannot respond.
And the reason it 'derailed' is because the person I asked to clarify made did not say they were paraphrasing. They kept on that Ashenden had said it.
User avatar Dr. Maserati
Veteran
 
Posts: 11,437
Joined: 19 Jun 2009 10:31

20 Aug 2013 00:00

The job of the sporting media is to report on sport.

Holding the media accountable for uncovering stories about doping is pointless. They are announcers, not investigative journalists.

If anyone wants to hold the media accountable for investigative journalism about cheating, conspiracies, or any other information about the underbelly of cycling, they have the right to go after those stories themselves. There is an opportunity for publication present. Go for it!
TheBean
Junior Member
 
Posts: 211
Joined: 23 Jan 2013 00:16

20 Aug 2013 00:18

TheBean wrote:The job of the sporting media is to report on sport.

Holding the media accountable for uncovering stories about doping is pointless. They are announcers, not investigative journalists....


Yup but there is also the concept of "dumb insolence" (borrowed from WW2 Marines :)) to consider, whereby if they know something but say nothing they should be held accountable.
The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."
User avatar sittingbison
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,298
Joined: 05 Jul 2012 08:11
Location: Perth WA

20 Aug 2013 00:21

sittingbison wrote:Yup but there is also the concept of "dumb insolence" (borrowed from WW2 Marines :)) to consider, whereby if they know something but say nothing they should be held accountable.


True to a point, but it puts announcers/commentators in a rather more central position on the entire production than they actually possess. It's a parasitical profession in that sense.
Sometimes, I wish all the bits of my life had an ignore button...

hrotha wrote:Following pro cycling is like reading A Song of Ice and Fire. You better not get too attached to any of the characters.


Opinions are a bit like a**eholes. Everybody has one, and they are often full of the same thing.
User avatar martinvickers
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,064
Joined: 15 Oct 2012 12:59
Location: Ireland

19 Sep 2016 23:26

How is "black box thinker" Syed doing ? Have we heard much from him in recent days ? Lately he had been doing a good job on twitter defending Sky and Sutton and lots of his new friends. I loved his line "the surprising truth about success".

He may well get exactly what he wished for - a surprise.
Freddythefrog
Member
 
Posts: 697
Joined: 10 Jul 2010 06:50

04 Jul 2018 19:28

Was on the commute home tonight and listening to the Media Show on BBC Radio 4 BBC and I heard this little gem. We often argue here about minutiae, but often those with a more global perspective see through the whole charade of cycling for what it is.

The focus of the program was sports journalism and the host Amol Rajan had a variety of guests including Nick Harris from the Mail on Sunday, who has done a lot of stories about the abuse of PEDs that beset Sport.

The conversation got to discuss access by journalists to the stars of sports and some other guy was blathering on about how wonderful it was to be able to get good access the England football team right now and how the journalists were able to find out more about their personalities of the stars and write about them more personally and weren’t these wonderful stories about their personalities?

Then was the kick back. The program makers had it dialled and knew exactly where “increased access” could take sports stars and their management in a PED riddled world.

Step forward and take a bow, cycling journalists……………..


https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b85m94 around 15.50

Amol Rajan
They were compromised; in many cases they got very close, they got very excited by access and therefore they didn’t say things that would damage their best contacts. Isn’t that the truth of what happened?

Nick Harris
Absolutely, in cycling, the amount of cycling journalists who must have known about all kinds of things going on in cycling for many years and, let me tell you, still do, and still aren’t writing it, is actually shocking.

William Fotheringham, Richard Moore, Daniel Friebe & Lionel Birnie – their whole careers written off in about 30 seconds, in an excellent pithy take.
Freddythefrog
Member
 
Posts: 697
Joined: 10 Jul 2010 06:50

Re:

05 Jul 2018 12:33

Freddythefrog wrote:Was on the commute home tonight and listening to the Media Show on BBC Radio 4 BBC and I heard this little gem. We often argue here about minutiae, but often those with a more global perspective see through the whole charade of cycling for what it is.

The focus of the program was sports journalism and the host Amol Rajan had a variety of guests including Nick Harris from the Mail on Sunday, who has done a lot of stories about the abuse of PEDs that beset Sport.

The conversation got to discuss access by journalists to the stars of sports and some other guy was blathering on about how wonderful it was to be able to get good access the England football team right now and how the journalists were able to find out more about their personalities of the stars and write about them more personally and weren’t these wonderful stories about their personalities?

Then was the kick back. The program makers had it dialled and knew exactly where “increased access” could take sports stars and their management in a PED riddled world.

Step forward and take a bow, cycling journalists……………..


https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b85m94 around 15.50

Amol Rajan
They were compromised; in many cases they got very close, they got very excited by access and therefore they didn’t say things that would damage their best contacts. Isn’t that the truth of what happened?

Nick Harris
Absolutely, in cycling, the amount of cycling journalists who must have known about all kinds of things going on in cycling for many years and, let me tell you, still do, and still aren’t writing it, is actually shocking.

William Fotheringham, Richard Moore, Daniel Friebe & Lionel Birnie – their whole careers written off in about 30 seconds, in an excellent pithy take.
So Amol Rajan - the guy who thought it was a good idea to rebroadcast Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood speech' recently - allows one of his guests to scapegoat one sport, and doesn't pull him up and point out all the journalists who get too close to footballers to properly report the sport, or all the journalists who get too close to track and field athletes to properly report to sport, or all the journalists who get too close to golfers to properly report the sport, instead he allows the mis-representation to happen, and you're suggesting this should be applauded, somehow?

The silence induced by access is not confined to one sport. FFS, it's not even confined to sport, you can see it on the business pages, the politics pages, every bloody page. It hardly needs a media studies graduate to point this out, now does it?
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,669
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

05 Jul 2018 13:47

fmk_RoI wrote:
Freddythefrog wrote:Was on the commute home tonight and listening to the Media Show on BBC Radio 4 BBC and I heard this little gem. We often argue here about minutiae, but often those with a more global perspective see through the whole charade of cycling for what it is.

The focus of the program was sports journalism and the host Amol Rajan had a variety of guests including Nick Harris from the Mail on Sunday, who has done a lot of stories about the abuse of PEDs that beset Sport.

The conversation got to discuss access by journalists to the stars of sports and some other guy was blathering on about how wonderful it was to be able to get good access the England football team right now and how the journalists were able to find out more about their personalities of the stars and write about them more personally and weren’t these wonderful stories about their personalities?

Then was the kick back. The program makers had it dialled and knew exactly where “increased access” could take sports stars and their management in a PED riddled world.

Step forward and take a bow, cycling journalists……………..


https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b85m94 around 15.50

Amol Rajan
They were compromised; in many cases they got very close, they got very excited by access and therefore they didn’t say things that would damage their best contacts. Isn’t that the truth of what happened?

Nick Harris
Absolutely, in cycling, the amount of cycling journalists who must have known about all kinds of things going on in cycling for many years and, let me tell you, still do, and still aren’t writing it, is actually shocking.

William Fotheringham, Richard Moore, Daniel Friebe & Lionel Birnie – their whole careers written off in about 30 seconds, in an excellent pithy take.
So Amol Rajan - the guy who thought it was a good idea to rebroadcast Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood speech' recently - allows one of his guests to scapegoat one sport, and doesn't pull him up and point out all the journalists who get too close to footballers to properly report the sport, or all the journalists who get too close to track and field athletes to properly report to sport, or all the journalists who get too close to golfers to properly report the sport, instead he allows the mis-representation to happen, and you're suggesting this should be applauded, somehow?

The silence induced by access is not confined to one sport. FFS, it's not even confined to sport, you can see it on the business pages, the politics pages, every bloody page. It hardly needs a media studies graduate to point this out, now does it?


If only this was not the clinic and only cycling related we could spend the rest of our lives picking through the microscopic hairs of this :rolleyes:
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,456
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Re:

05 Jul 2018 14:40

fmk_RoI wrote:So Amol Rajan - the guy who thought it was a good idea to rebroadcast Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood speech' recently - allows one of his guests to scapegoat one sport, and doesn't pull him up and point out all the journalists who get too close to footballers to properly report the sport, or all the journalists who get too close to track and field athletes to properly report to sport, or all the journalists who get too close to golfers to properly report the sport, instead he allows the mis-representation to happen, and you're suggesting this should be applauded, somehow?

The silence induced by access is not confined to one sport. FFS, it's not even confined to sport, you can see it on the business pages, the politics pages, every bloody page. It hardly needs a media studies graduate to point this out, now does it?


I listened to it all. There was no scapegoating.

The point I took away was that the program was indicating that it was across all sports as exhibited by a football journalist getting very excited about new levels of access - a very contemporary event - that was then given the very fair counter that one should tread very carefully down that path as there were dangers a plenty - exhibit A - the recent history of sports journalism with respect to cycling. The aspect that was unique to sport was the abuse of PEDs. And that made it worthy of comment.

The aspect of bias in reporting even was traced to a personal level and Nick Harris was questioned about his own support of Southampton football club and how that influenced his reporting in football. It was all well balanced.

I think I can see that joint between the calf and thigh moving rapidly !

As to the Rivers of Blood speech. I listened to both the program and the in depth BBC analysis of why it was broadcast. My own view was that if anyone did take the time to listen to it, they would be a very strange person to be anything other than less racist after having done so.
Freddythefrog
Member
 
Posts: 697
Joined: 10 Jul 2010 06:50

Previous

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ctaylor, Nighttrain99 and 56 guests

Back to top