• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Christian Science Monitor weighs in...

May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Euro...nce-Can-Lance-Armstrong-keep-his-Teflon-image

quoting Kimmage as well; "In a statement after the most recent Landis allegations, Armstrong said that he had too much work to do in his “continued fight against cancer” to reply to the charges – a tactic he's frequently used to deflect criticism.

“This has been a constant thing with him, anytime he comes under pressure he takes out the cancer flag,” says Paul Kimmage, a sports journalist for the Sunday Times in London."


i dont know too much about this magazine, does it have much sway in usa, i imagine the joe in the street is not a reader, but in circles that sit up and take notice it seems credible....Feds, government bodies, etc..
 
Well look at it this way - that is an article which says many of the things that people have been saying about Armstrong for years but which the media has been ignoring. While it isn't a huge article, or one with lots of new revelations, it is a different paper which is starting to question Armstrong, and that I think represents a change.

CSM is a pretty serious paper but I don't know how many people read it.
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
3
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Euro...nce-Can-Lance-Armstrong-keep-his-Teflon-image

quoting Kimmage as well; "In a statement after the most recent Landis allegations, Armstrong said that he had too much work to do in his “continued fight against cancer” to reply to the charges – a tactic he's frequently used to deflect criticism.

“This has been a constant thing with him, anytime he comes under pressure he takes out the cancer flag,” says Paul Kimmage, a sports journalist for the Sunday Times in London."


i dont know too much about this magazine, does it have much sway in usa, i imagine the joe in the street is not a reader, but in circles that sit up and take notice it seems credible....Feds, government bodies, etc..

CSM, despite the goofy name, is one of the most respected papers in the US.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Cobblestones said:
CSM, despite the goofy name, is one of the most respected papers in the US.

So XXXX Inc is not gonna go after it then:rolleyes:

Ps anyone else notice the change in the XXXXX/RadioSmack ads on here:D
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Cobblestones said:
CSM, despite the goofy name, is one of the most respected papers in the US.

It is probably the most respected and vetted publication, historically. They also avoid bias to an extreme degree so, while LA won't worry about their circulation CSM's validation of the story will embolden others.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
Oldman said:
It is probably the most respected and vetted publication, historically. They also avoid bias to an extreme degree so, while LA won't worry about their circulation CSM's validation of the story will embolden others.

+1

We Americans (and we're hardly alone in this) generally seek media outlets that match our own biases. The most credible left- and right- wing papers are probably the NY Times and WS Journal, respectively - but most any reader of either is well aware of each paper's slant. The CSM, on the other hand, has consistently been the least biased (and therefore IMO, one of the most credible) US media outlet that I know of. Since they don't draw from one political camp or the the other, this hits them in the circulation department, but it also leaves them very widely respected as an unbiased source of news.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
The forums here and elsewhere certainly support the article's closing quote, from VN's Neal Rogers:

“I think people have sort of made up their minds about Lance,” says Rogers of VeloNews. “There are people who hate him and see this as vindication and the people who love Lance, they’ve already turned a blind eye. I don’t think this is going to change that much.”
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
Dunno - I haven't read much of his stuff (or any of it in the last couple of years for that matter). My guess is he tries to appear neutral but has to be nice to Lance since VN is US-based and he'll surely want LA to pose for the cover again at some point.
 
Oct 29, 2009
433
0
0
Visit site
What struck me most about the CSM article was that it was clear, concise and exceptionally well-written.

There is beauty in simplicity and economy, which is what is needed for its non-cycling readership unfamililar with these issues.
 
Jun 21, 2009
847
0
0
Visit site
powerste said:
The forums here and elsewhere certainly support the article's closing quote, from VN's Neal Rogers:

“I think people have sort of made up their minds about Lance,” says Rogers of VeloNews. “There are people who hate him and see this as vindication and the people who love Lance, they’ve already turned a blind eye. I don’t think this is going to change that much.”

enemy of floyd or not, he's probably right :(
 
Oldman said:
It is probably the most respected and vetted publication, historically. They also avoid bias to an extreme degree so, while LA won't worry about their circulation CSM's validation of the story will embolden others.

Exactly. If I see a story on Google News I want to read about, CSM is the first I look for.
 
Wait a minute, something is terribly wrong here. 14 posts in and not one "long time lurker, first time poster" has popped in to discredit the CSM?

I mean, Rupert Murdoch must have at least tried to buy it at sometime? Maybe he had a latte at the Starbucks next door? Hey, isn't he a Christian? Speaking of Christians, maybe it's the Pope out to get Lance for divorce and kiddies out of wedlock then. Oh wait, Catholics aren't "Christian" (apparently not believing in Christ), so it can't be them.

It must be the religious right (the Catholics will tell you it's ALWAYS the Protestants) out to get Lance for his divorce and kiddies out of wedlock, or maybe the hippy Jesus-freak left out to get him for bikes rides with Dubya.

On second thought, look at the name: Christian SCIENCE Monitor. It's gotta be that dirtbag Ashenden spouting his voodoo science or those cheese-eating nutjob "scientists" at Chatenay-Malabry.

Come to think of it, everyone knows you can't be a Christian AND a scientist. God created the world, man didn't come from apes (on that note, what the hell is that Andy Schleck victory salute anyway?)
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
workingclasshero said:
enemy of floyd or not, he's probably right :(

i dont think so, a lot of fanboys have gone quiet on here, wonderlance, polish et al have not been posting....so while maybe the doubt has started and the love just might turn to hate or worse they'll forgive him...
 
Oct 29, 2009
433
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
i dont think so, a lot of fanboys have gone quiet on here, wonderlance, polish et al have not been posting....so while maybe the doubt has started and the love just might turn to hate or worse they'll forgive him...

Good point. Love is closer to hate than indifference.

Witness the many posters to these forums who profess to coming to the sport through Lance and have come to loathe him.

Beware the rage of the convert.
 
Jun 21, 2009
847
0
0
Visit site
CycloErgoSum said:
Good point. Love is closer to hate than indifference.

Witness the many posters to these forums who profess to coming to the sport through Lance and have come to loathe him.

Beware the rage of the convert.

the many?? is it not two? (im thinking of scottsocal and the swordsman)
 
powerste said:
+1

We Americans (and we're hardly alone in this) generally seek media outlets that match our own biases. The most credible left- and right- wing papers are probably the NY Times and WS Journal, respectively - but most any reader of either is well aware of each paper's slant. The CSM, on the other hand, has consistently been the least biased (and therefore IMO, one of the most credible) US media outlet that I know of. Since they don't draw from one political camp or the the other, this hits them in the circulation department, but it also leaves them very widely respected as an unbiased source of news.

Left and right? They're two papers that represent the SAME interests...there IS no "left" and "right" in the mainstream media. It's like the Democrats and Republicans...they represent business interests, and other than tone and some ideas about gay people, they really don't differ much.

You're right about the CSM though, really it's what mainstream journalism should be, or close to it anyways.
 
Jul 17, 2009
406
0
0
Visit site
MacRoadie said:
Wait a minute, something is terribly wrong here. 14 posts in and not one "long time lurker, first time poster" has popped in to discredit the CSM?

I mean, Rupert Murdoch must have at least tried to buy it at sometime? Maybe he had a latte at the Starbucks next door? Hey, isn't he a Christian? Speaking of Christians, maybe it's the Pope out to get Lance for divorce and kiddies out of wedlock then. Oh wait, Catholics aren't "Christian" (apparently not believing in Christ), so it can't be them.

It must be the religious right (the Catholics will tell you it's ALWAYS the Protestants) out to get Lance for his divorce and kiddies out of wedlock, or maybe the hippy Jesus-freak left out to get him for bikes rides with Dubya.

On second thought, look at the name: Christian SCIENCE Monitor. It's gotta be that dirtbag Ashenden spouting his voodoo science or those cheese-eating nutjob "scientists" at Chatenay-Malabry.

Come to think of it, everyone knows you can't be a Christian AND a scientist. God created the world, man didn't come from apes (on that note, what the hell is that Andy Schleck victory salute anyway?)

Ummmmmm maybe because there is nothing to discredit in this article? It just provides a representation of what is going on in the world of Armstrong. Now I would comment on the comments in the article, like the one the original post quotes from Kimmage. Kimmage expects Lance to respond more to the accusations (or as Kimmages calls them 'Charges')? I thought Lance already replied, be it discrediting Landis, etc. What more is expected from him until he is truly 'charged'. Does Kimmage want Lance to make a statement every day to the same old stuff (as Lance calls it SSDD)? Read your post to yourself - are you an angry person or need something to make you feel better about yourself? Seems like many of your posts are self fulfilling.
 
Dec 4, 2009
31
0
0
Visit site
CSM has been around for years and never been into "paprazzi" news reports.

With that said I didn't see anything new or unexpected, same old, same old.

As far as supena's go that's just part of the inquiry If enough evidence is gathered and it supports what the Feds are looking for then they can indict who ever they feel they can get a guilty verdict on...

The Balco Investigation took years to come to fruition. I'd be suprised to see anything in the court system until next year at best. Out of the hundreds of customers Balco had only a very few were ever convicted. Some of the articles about the investigation are based on the Feds getting a convition for fraud not drugs. It is really very complicated. I wonder if for example Discovery or Trek refused to be part and parcel of the prosecution what would happen?

From the ashes shall rise the Phoenix........
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
smittyjs said:
CSM has been around for years and never been into "paprazzi" news reports.

With that said I didn't see anything new or unexpected, same old, same old.

As far as supena's go that's just part of the inquiry If enough evidence is gathered and it supports what the Feds are looking for then they can indict who ever they feel they can get a guilty verdict on...

The Balco Investigation took years to come to fruition. I'd be suprised to see anything in the court system until next year at best. Out of the hundreds of customers Balco had only a very few were ever convicted. Some of the articles about the investigation are based on the Feds getting a convition for fraud not drugs. It is really very complicated. I wonder if for example Discovery or Trek refused to be part and parcel of the prosecution what would happen?

From the ashes shall rise the Phoenix........

Well, better check the other thread. Grand Jury has been convened and subpoenas have been issued. Slow, this is not.

If Trek or Nike refuse, as they have been clear beneficiaries, I suppose they could be called as co-conspirators. Trek already admitted they supplied extra bikes, and seem to be placing an arms length by saying they were not told what they were for and they did become aware they were being sold off.

Tax issues, fraud (simple, wire, mail), etc, etc, etc

I think it is over.
 

TRENDING THREADS