Journalists and doping

[Pantani_lives]

How do cycling journalists treat the doping problem? I would like to compare them in different countries (-bad, +good). In Belgium and the Netherlands journalists treat Armstrong like a hero and most of them never mention that he's a doping suspect.
-Mart Smeets (Dutch tv): treats Armstrong like a cycling legend, ridicules anyone who dares to criticize the Boss. Interviewed Johan Bruyneel without asking one question about doping.
-Karl Vannieuwkerke (Belgian tv): calls Armstrong a hero, never mentions that he's a doping suspect. However he did criticize Vinokourov after winning Liege-Bastogne-Liege.
+Lieven Van Gils (Belgian tv): asked Vinokourov about his doping past. Vino swore an oath that he's clean today.
+Carl Berteele (Belgian radio): explained the Landis case on the radio.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Mart Smeets takes it way too far.

But TV station policy is to keep milking the legend as long as possible so the casual fans tune in.

I am sure that any criticism of His Sociopathic Majesty would get letters of complaint from the wackos, but when the usual bunch of ar*e is spouted guys like us just laugh or turn it off.

Sports journalism is stuck in a rut of obsessing about "access" to the stars. They figure idiots are way more interested in what stars have to say than what people say about them. Thus ex pros who know the right people, and sycophantic lovestruck groupies who want to ride celebrity shirttails to boost their own profile are the norm I'm afraid.

Ask lance anything difficult and you'll get blacklisted. Much better to make a spoonfed piece on Bruyneel's tactical genius or Lance's inspiration of idiots.

 

[smaryka]

Seems in the UK (both British Eurosport and ITV4) they just want to avoid the issue entirely. Heads in the sand, don't-ask-don't-tell, etc. I guess they kind of have to do that when they've got guys like Roche and Hayles commentating in the studio. Might get kind of uncomfortable if they start discussing PEDs and the effects of doping or non-doping in the peloton.

 

[Roland Rat]

Seems in the UK (both British Eurosport and ITV4) they just want to avoid the issue entirely. Heads in the sand, don't-ask-don't-tell, etc. I guess they kind of have to do that when they've got guys like Roche and Hayles commentating in the studio. Might get kind of uncomfortable if they start discussing PEDs and the effects of doping or non-doping in the peloton.

That will be a legal issue as much as anything, damages for libel/slander are very high over here and we tend to be a very conservative bunch. Even so, Kimmage does what he can. Besides, saying nothing is better than promoting the myth. I think Harmon and Kelly are very good, they leave subtle hints/pauses occasionally. Also, Rendell and Boulting (ITV4 presenters) do say as much as they can in their Real Peloton podcast, without opening themselves up to legal problems.

Phil and Paul... well, no need to say anything. But then they're honorary Americans now their main employer is Versus.

 

[nia O'Malley]

I'd love to tell you what the irish commentators are saying, unfotunately I can't (They've said Nicolas Roche 34 times in the last 7 minutes is all I know )

I really really need to learn irish.
Of course putting off customers by constantly harping on about doping seems counter productive and silly.

 

[sherer]

think you need to think a bit deeper about this.

If you are a cycling journalist then you have to interview these people all the time. Interview LA or AC or any of the other top stars and ask them hard questions about what they are on and doping and you won't interview them again. Don't think their bosses would like that very much.

It's all very much a community and they have to follow each other around the Europe with the same people and riders. Unless there is a scandal then things won't be delved into very deeply. It's a legal issue and if a journo can't interview and report properly they risk losing their jobs

 

[Master50]

I am pretty sure that most of the press uses alcohol as their favourite drug. I am pretty sure they are all drinkers.

 

[khardung la]

In Spain the public television TVE (P. Delgado among them) are in my opinion very permissive with doping, often trying to justify the unjustifiable as with Valverde. But in Eurosport Spain Antonio Alix is really honest and talks quite straightly about the problem (not only in cycling by the way). Also he makes a much better show and seems to know better.

 

[Pantani_lives]

I guess it's true that a journalists who asks hard questions would be blacklisted. However they should realize that ignoring the problem is unethical, and will make them look like fools if the truth is ever revealed.

 

[Barrus]

-Karl Vannieuwkerke (Belgian tv): calls Armstrong a hero, never mentions that he's a doping suspect. However he did criticize Vinokourov after winning Liege-Bastogne-Liege.

Concerning him, he is now blacklisted by Bruyneel, who would come to vive le velo, but Vannieuwkerke could not talk about the Flandis-affaire, Vannieuwkerke remained vigilant and said that they would talk about FLandis. Bruyneel is no not on vive le velo tonight.

 

[callac]

French comments today were... interesting.

First I don't remember ever seeing a sport event where the comments were so not talking about the event itself for at least one hour! The first hour on the air was all about wine and the famous "Châteaux" around Bordeaux that were to see from the helicopter.
They cut this discussion a tiny bit to talk about LA's start: his fanboy Thierry Adam couldn't help it... and had to say something like "in an area with great wines, here comes a great champion"... which made Laurent Fignon add "but the great champion doesn't age as well as great wine".

Noting a bit later that many RS riders weren't doing good at all, Fignon noticed that it was possible that they could lose the team lead, and added "malheureusement" (sadly) this wasn't going to happen.

A few days ago, Fignon also explained that he went to US for a bit to seek treatment (invited there by LA ), but he's now back to his french medical center...
Also when asked about the investigation going on in US, LA was sitting next to Fignon, and turned towards him and stared at him while saying that LeMond would need to tell the truth about 1989...

I'm probably reading way too much into this, but I'm wondering if LA didn't try a bit too much to become "friend" with Fignon, and it just didn't take?

(and yeah, I'm thinking of the $300k... If ever that was proposed to Fignon, this would show a totally dumb behavior. What could he know about any EPO use by LeMond? .. but I'm this point, nothing could surprise me anymore).

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Ha! There is no way Lance, or anyone else, is going to fool or intimidate Fignon. Larry's way too smart, and blunt.

Sports journalism is stuck in a rut of obsessing about "access" to the stars. They figure idiots are way more interested in what stars have to say than what people say about them.

As one who has worked in broadcast TV for a while (though not as a reporter), I will vouch for this as a pretty apt statement.

I guess it's true that a journalists who asks hard questions would be blacklisted. However they should realize that ignoring the problem is unethical, and will make them look like fools if the truth is ever revealed.

This is also true, but sadly the case. The media needs to show it's strength in numbers in the same way that the press corps all asks pointed questions of the President and Congress. It's come time for the media in cycling to stand closer together and ask pointed questions about doping, the omerta, and push towards bettering the sport. This doesn't mean they all have to be as direct as Kimmage was to LA last year about "the cancer has returned" but to simply lob softballs at the riders out of fear that they won't get to talk to them anymore is quite simply shameful journalism.

 

[joe_papp]

I guess it's true that a journalists who asks hard questions would be blacklisted. However they should realize that ignoring the problem is unethical, and will make them look like fools if the truth is ever revealed.

I don't have time to look through my copies right now, but I'm fairly certain that in one of his books, David Walsh actually writes formally about this question, and discusses how early attempts to expose the continued-infection of doping in european cycling after Festina were quashed by jittery editors.

I think.

 

[The Hitch]

Generaly the media will never ever dare to ask any non flattering questions of celebrities. There is a show in the Uk which looks at this horrendous state of affairs called Newswipe with Charlie Booker ( i think thats his name)

Among the worst examples there are interviews with a bunch of thugs and total idiots called n dubs who in this new age actually manage to call themselves musicians and make money from it. Even though they were part of a government anti bullying campaign (ie they posed for pictures stuck on to posters of the campaign) they caused a controversy (or should have caused a controversy) when it was found that they sent death threats to an 80 year old lady who had phoned in to say she didnt like their music (ie she was a sane individual)

In the following week they had a number of interviews. Newswipe revealed the content of these interviews. The young thugs were asked what hollydays they went on, what clothes they buy, what awards they wanted to win but absolutely nothing about the death threats sent to the old lady. They then showed a recorded tape of one journalist who had asked the question if the group thought it ironic that while being part of an anti bullying campaign they had sent death threats to an old lady). Immediately a large bodyguard came forward to the journalist, pushed her away and said that she was harrrasing his client.

Another clip from the show which i recall was an interview by Sky's adam boulton with a politician, who was, as usual not very nice to the politician, and asked him tough questions. This was followed by a second interview, this time with a celebrity, about the exact same issues. The celebrity despite being far less knowledgable was allowed to present his opinions, without interruption, other than to be told how great and intelligent he is.

THis is i suspect what it must be like in cycling. 1 they are celebrities of a sort, so the journalists will naturaly be nice to them.
2 the cyclists, especially the bigger ones will have lawyers, bodyguards etc, ready to behave not nicely towards any journalists, who says more than he has to (like the journalist in my 1st example, kicked out for asking the wrong question)


There is no coincidence that every article i have read about Lance in the last few months has ended with almost the exact same sentence. "Mr Armstrong denies these accusations and he has never failed a drugs test" or some such.

 

[ProfTournesol]

Rupert Guinness (Australian, Fairfax Media) writes in his book about being blacklisted by LA and JB after he was seen stopping his car to give a lift to David Walsh (I think it was). No further access to them.

 

[nia O'Malley]

Ha! There is no way Lance, or anyone else, is going to fool or intimidate Fignon. Larry's way too smart, and blunt.

And dying. He doesn't care anymore, either.

 

[callac]

Wow, fanboy Thierry Adam said "who won't know yet at the end of the day who LA is... " and mentioned the investigation in US. Wind's really turning.

EDIT: Laurent Jalabert just 'yelled' his disgust at Radioshack's behavior for the jersey thing.

 

[nia O'Malley]

Is there anybody useful in the peloton of the last ten years who actually likes him??