Has the worm turned? Complicit media.

[Darryl Webster]

With the release of the SI article, ( watered down but still a powerful article for the unaware mass audiance) does the forum feel the mainstreem media is about to turn the corner?
I`ve long held the view that many, many, journalists were aware all was not legit but towed the editorial line.
The editorial line being whatever the legal dept tells em it is.
However I reckon edititors have long memories and are also unforgiving if any one legaly challenges them and they KNOW theyve told the truth.
Ie..The Sunday Times.
Were this has happened with polititions and , in due course , the truth, the one the paper reported first time round, has finaly emerged the papers and courts have been merciless.
Are we about to see this begin with Lance?

 

[Muriel]

I think the climate has been changing slowly, maybe more noticeable in the US than this side of the pond, for getting on for a year now. I myself have witnessed former Armstrong fans beginning to come to terms with what now almost seems an inevitability.

I think you're right in so far as the media organisations are concerned. I do believe the legal boys are getting a little less twitchy these days and we'll probably see more headline media channels covering this story more explicitly.

 

[sniper]

I've noticed an increasing awareness among media when the Dutch NOS broadcasted the interview with Kimmage: traditionally, the sportsdepartment of the NOS (under Mart Smeets' command) had been very pro-Armstrong

 

[Barrus]

I'll just repost what I posted in the SI thread earlier, that the environment changed even today, quite drastically

Also funny that everytime I look at Dutch news site the information about the article becomes more prominent and the wording in the title more damning about Armstrong.

It started as a small line somewhere saying that Armstrong wasnt phased about the new allegations.
And now it is at the front of the sports pages and the first article you see on the front pages concerning sports with statements like:

New allegations about Armstrong: Ferrari possibly linked to Radioshack team

Armstrong under fire: wanted to enjoy his last race, but as of today that appears like a lost dream

Armstrong retained relationship with Ferrari

Front page of one of the more higher class papers

Magazine that normally favours Armstrong alleges doping of Armstrong

One of the bigger sportspapers

Armstrong is THE instigator of doping

Just now the largest newspaper in the Netherlands also included a second, smaller headline just above the headline of Armstrong, which reads:

Sports Illustrated has obtained damning evidence

Something which was not yet shown earlier when I wrote this post

 

[Andynonomous]

What about those "journalists" who have defended him

I hope that the "journalists" that have defended or promoted Armstrong, in spite of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence against him, find themselves on the unemployment line.

The excuse "I was lied to as well", doesn't cut it with me. Anybody with an ounce of common sense has known for years that it was overwhelmingly likely that Armstrong was a juicer.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

I hope that the "journalists" that have defendedor promoted Armstrong, in spite of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence against him, find themselves on the unemployment line.

The excuse "I was lied to as well", doesn't cut it with me. Anybody with an ounce of common sense has known for years that it was overwhelmingly likely that Armstrong was a juicer.

I want to see Fat Idiot Mart Smeets break down on Dutch TV. I want proper gasping sobs.

That might make up for the "sex wee" he did during his Lance interview and "documentary last year.

 

[Darryl Webster]

I hope that the "journalists" that have defendedor promoted Armstrong, in spite of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence against him, find themselves on the unemployment line.

The excuse "I was lied to as well", doesn't cut it with me. Anybody with an ounce of common sense has known for years that it was overwhelmingly likely that Armstrong was a juicer.

Though I cant see it happening the sacking of the Phil @ Paul panto Dames woud absalutly be the icing on the cake!

 

[thehog]

I hope that the "journalists" that have defended or promoted Armstrong, in spite of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence against him, find themselves on the unemployment line.

The excuse "I was lied to as well", doesn't cut it with me. Anybody with an ounce of common sense has known for years that it was overwhelmingly likely that Armstrong was a juicer.

Many of whom enjoyed said hookers and blow on the Livestrong dime. They weren't going to say anything. Just keep the party line.

 

[sniper]

Though I cant see it happening the sacking of the Phil @ Paul panto Dames woud absalutly be the icing on the cake!

I'd been wanting to use that set phrase:
The icing on the cake, for me, would really be Verbruggen and Pat going down for taking bribes and covering up positives.
(sorry, off topic)

 

[skippy]

Well you guys were right about SI doing damage to Lance's image !

The report about "Sports Personalities" effect on Ad Campaigns is more relevant from my point of view.

flandis retires to count his "money"? 10% of nothing will not keep him in fresh air let alone comfort !

No doubt there are a few crowing today so i shall take a holiday whilst the mushrooms enjoy the limelight

 

[LeakyBoat]

I'm sorry to inform you that the journalists have just snorted all of the icing.

 

[BotanyBay]

Lance has had his finger in the dike,

trying to manage the story of his career, for more than a decade. What should have been a growing snowball, ended up being a damn-burst. He was able to intimidate cycling publications for years by using his sponsors to dissuade them from reporting negative stories.

But now the water pressure is just too high. And it has nothing to do with a "tide turning". The water behind the damn became too big to not notice.

And thus:

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Well you guys were right about SI doing damage to Lance's image !

The report about "Sports Personalities" effect on Ad Campaigns is more relevant from my point of view.

flandis retires to count his "money"? 10% of nothing will not keep him in fresh air let alone comfort !

No doubt there are a few crowing today so i shall take a holiday whilst the mushrooms enjoy the limelight

The most relevant part of your comment is the "junior member" next to your username.

yawn.

 

[Darryl Webster]

Lance has had his finger in the dike, trying to manage the story of his career, for more than a decade. What should have been a growing snowball, ended up being a damn-burst. He was able to intimidate cycling publications for years by using his sponsors to dissuade them from reporting negative stories.

But now the water pressure is just too high. And it has nothing to do with a "tide turning". The water behind the damn became too big to not notice.

And thus:

tis one of those rare days being a "hater" actualy feels good!

 

[Cobblestoned]

With the release of the SI article, ( watered down but still a powerful article for the unaware mass audiance) does the forum feel the mainstreem media is about to turn the corner?
I`ve long held the view that many, many, journalists were aware all was not legit but towed the editorial line.
The editorial line being whatever the legal dept tells em it is.
However I reckon edititors have long memories and are also unforgiving if any one legaly challenges them and they KNOW theyve told the truth.
Ie..The Sunday Times.
Were this has happened with polititions and , in due course , the truth, the one the paper reported first time round, has finaly emerged the papers and courts have been merciless.
Are we about to see this begin with Lance?

Same happened in Germany with Ullrich for many years now. Nothing new.

Der Spiegel and SZ wanted to kick Jan to death. They crossed lines and it was disgusting, often deeply personal, involving family and very very private affairs.
Pure revenge when Ullrich was finally convicted. He sued Spiegel during his early carreer and SZ's Mr.Burkert, who did a "nice" book with Jan, was finally offended and got deeply personal and nasty.
We call him Wallow-Andi.

 

[jimbob_in_co]

Well you guys were right about SI doing damage to Lance's image !

How can telling the truth about a person truly 'damage' anything? If someone is a lying punk, then the fake face they sold to the adoring masses for so long was nothing but a fraud.

No doubt there are a few crowing today so i shall take a holiday whilst the mushrooms enjoy the limelight

Make a long holiday there Skippy. This won't blow over quickly, the truth rarely does once it is finally exposed. This should give you plenty of time to post identical entries on your numerous blogs, and commiserate with 'cancer char-lebrities' you know.

BTW Insults are still insults, no matter how much (and how poorly) you try to channel "The Bards" manner of writing.

 

[jimbob_in_co]

The story itself is kinda complicated for the mass audience with it's references to T ratios and unnamed officials from 15 years ago. I myself got bored after reading half of it and relied on the highlights. I don't know if it will have any more long term effect than the WSJ article.

No effect at all, go check out the current lead story (with a huge headline image) at http://www.versus.com/

You hardly notice it.

 

[theswordsman]

I often do twitter keyword searches to see how people react to things. For some time now, seeing a LS yellow twibbon (sorry, folks) over someone's profile pic doesn't mean they're pro-Lance. Some changed after the original WSJ article, or the NY Times, or the early Sports Illustrated one. Some changed during the Tour when they saw the story about Contador delivering watches at the Radio Shack bus, or saw the pic that looked like Lance was standing up on his bike yelling at Alberto. Some people didn't like the "28 jersey" delaying Stage 21.

A lot of subscribers don't have their issues yet, or people don't know the whole article is online. But what I think we have today is another great chance to see the true colors of journos and publications. I look at Google News and wonder which articles have been bought and which are sincere, as it's been here since that first night the Landis story broke. This isn't the kind of story people can be neutral about. I think it's just good that so many people here the story again and again from sources they trust.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

With the release of the SI article, ( watered down but still a powerful article for the unaware mass audiance) does the forum feel the mainstreem media is about to turn the corner?
I`ve long held the view that many, many, journalists were aware all was not legit but towed the editorial line.
The editorial line being whatever the legal dept tells em it is.
However I reckon edititors have long memories and are also unforgiving if any one legaly challenges them and they KNOW theyve told the truth.
Ie..The Sunday Times.
Were this has happened with polititions and , in due course , the truth, the one the paper reported first time round, has finaly emerged the papers and courts have been merciless.
Are we about to see this begin with Lance?

When the WSJ broke the Landis story last year, that was the moment everything changed for Lance.

It takes a respectable newsource to change public opinion as you will not get that from cycling related publications who often know the real story but are unwilling to publish for a variety of reasons (access, legal, editorial, advertising from the industry, etc) -alas this happens with all sports.

Armstrong had been able to contain damage from other articles by dismissing it as bias from the European press. But once the WSJ piece hit it set a precedent, and all other self respecting publications could no longer avoid the story.
This starts a battle between different publications looking to have a scoop and reveal new information that for many of the general American public will seem new and shocking.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yeah I think it will have the same effect as the WSJ article. Perhaps less because unless they can prove the Popo bit, this is mainly about the 1990s.

Absolutely - people will automatically assume when Lance insisted he never ever took PEDs that he was talking before 2000 and before he started amassing his Tour win's.
Ya, I am sure that's how it will go.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Nothing New

This is what media does. Build up the myth to stay in business, then destroy the myth to stay in business.

It should come as no surprise that Versus is on the story. While they are tearing the Armstrong myth down, they are searching for another personality to build up. Mini Phinney comes to mind....

If Wonderboy confronts anyone on the media side he'll get the same response, "It's nothing personal."

The icing on the cake for me is for Tailwind principals convicted of Federal felonies with prison time.

Pie in the sky would be Tailwind felonies AND Pat and Hein prosecutions for something and getting LeMond in the UCI to take over. There was a guy running ASO/Le Tour that was aggressively anti-dope. If not LeMond, then that guy.

 

[BikeCentric]

The worm has most definitely turned. I can't emphacize enough how important the publication of that Sports Illustrated article is. Sports Illustrated is by far the most respected and widely read sports magazine in the US. It primarily covers the 2 biggest American sports: NFL and MLB. It's then got a smattering of NHL, NBA, and NCAA college fooball now and then. The point being it's an extremely mainstream article read by your stereotypical American sports fan who follows the big American sports, and this article will damage Armstrong's reputation mortally among the American sports fan public. Essentially this article alone will give Lance the Barry Bonds treatment, his reputation in the US is now irreparably destroyed even if Novitzsky were to drop the investigation completely. And I don't see that happening.

 

[frenchfry]

When the WSJ broke the Landis story last year, that was the moment everything changed for Lance.

It takes a respectable newsource to change public opinion as you will not get that from cycling related publications who often know the real story but are unwilling to publish for a variety of reasons (access, legal, editorial, advertising from the industry, etc) -alas this happens with all sports.

Armstrong had been able to contain damage from other articles by dismissing it as bias from the European press. But once the WSJ piece hit it set a precedent, and all other self respecting publications could no longer avoid the story.
This starts a battle between different publications looking to have a scoop and reveal new information that for many of the general American public will seem new and shocking.

No more French bashing - Lancey-poo is getting sacked by his own!

 

[BikeCentric]

No more French bashing - Lancey-poo is getting sacked by his own!

Oh and on that subject, Lance essentially calling Sports Illustrated "liars" will not go over well at all. The magazine is absolutely revered in this country.

 

[Cobblestoned]

This is what media does. Build up the myth to stay in business, then destroy the myth to stay in business.

It should come as no surprise that Versus is on the story. While they are tearing the Armstrong myth down, they are searching for another personality to build up. Mini Phinney comes to mind....

If Wonderboy confronts anyone on the media side he'll get the same response, "It's nothing personal."

The icing on the cake for me is for Tailwind principals convicted of Federal felonies with prison time.

Pie in the sky would be Tailwind felonies AND Pat and Hein prosecutions for something and getting LeMond in the UCI to take over. There was a guy running ASO/Le Tour that was aggressively anti-dope. If not LeMond, then that guy.

Exactely. They need tools to survive.