CN article: Amgen's unlikely partnership with cycling

[hmronnow]

In this article, CN reports an interview with Amgen. They quote how Amgen wants to help fight doping etc.

However, I seem to remember that a few years back it was revealed that there had been almost no doping controls at TOC. Unless my memory is incorrect, would it not have been good journalism to bring also this othre side of the story? Or for instance mention what actions Amgen actually undertake during tihs year's TOC to fight doping?

Generalising from this, there are two things I often miss in CN journalism:
1) Very often they bring one-sided stories, without reference to history (including without reference to past articles in CN itself)
2) Why isn't there a possibility to write comments to the articles? This is becoming a more and more common feature.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Since this involves questions concerning CN's editorial policies, I am moving it to the appropriate forum.

Susan

 

[flicker]

In this article, CN reports an interview with Amgen. They quote how Amgen wants to help fight doping etc.

However, I seem to remember that a few years back it was revealed that there had been almost no doping controls at TOC. Unless my memory is incorrect, would it not have been good journalism to bring also this othre side of the story? Or for instance mention what actions Amgen actually undertake during tihs year's TOC to fight doping?

Generalising from this, there are two things I often miss in CN journalism:
1) Very often they bring one-sided stories, without reference to history (including without reference to past articles in CN itself)
2) Why isn't there a possibility to write comments to the articles? This is becoming a more and more common feature.

I think cycling news is awesome. If you have a problem with amgen take it up with amgen. Cycling news is to me the most unbiased, factual cycling publication available at this time.

 

[hmronnow]

I think cycling news is awesome. If you have a problem with amgen take it up with amgen. Cycling news is to me the most unbiased, factual cycling publication available at this time.

Sorry, I forgot to mention the obvious. Namely that CN is a very good site, which I visit often. Thanks a lot for providing this site. I didn't mean my post as critical as I now realize it read.

Inspired by the article, I wondered what other people on this forum thought of the Amgen representatives rationalization of their contribution towards anti-doping - in particular since (if I remember correctly) there was some issue about lack of testing few years back. This is why I posted in the clinic.

I then mistakenly confused my primary message with what was intended as small suggestions for what could make CN even better. Namely backwards reflection when reporting interviews, and posibility of providing comments to articles. I apologize if it seemed as harsh criticism.