Lance, after his crash on tv

[Henri Desgrange]

I really am not a big fan of Lance Armstrong, but I do think the exposure he's given to the sport, as general as it might be, brings in people who had no idea about pro cycling before.

The exposure he gains is for himself, not the sport. As some of the people he brings in well it could be argued that they still have no idea about pro cycling, because all they are interested in is Armstrong.

 

[Mellow Velo]

The exposure he gains is for himself, not the sport. As some of the people he brings in well it could be argued that they still have no idea about pro cycling, because all they are interested in is Armstrong.

Absolutely. Just like these people. VN's has reported that hundred's of journos that turned up in Castilla, have now, suddenly
de-materialised.

 

[skidmark]

The exposure he gains is for himself, not the sport. As some of the people he brings in well it could be argued that they still have no idea about pro cycling, because all they are interested in is Armstrong.

Like I said in my original post, I was brought in because the sport was covered in Canada, because of Armstrong. I am not really interested in him, I detest the Armstrong-centered coverage in english-speaking media, and I don't consider myself to have 'no idea about pro cycling', despite the fact that I was exposed to the sport through Armstrong.

So although I agree that he's a publicity-seeking opportunist, and although I agree that many journalists only engage with cycling because he's in it, and although I agree that lots of people that are made aware of the sport through the exposure that he's brought are just drooling Lance sycophants, I don't see how you could say the exposure is just for him, not for the sport. Fact - cycling was not broadcast live in north america (at least my part of it) before lance won the tour. It was after, even if it's just the TdF. I don't really think you can even argue that the exposure is just for him, because you can't keep a camera on one person for a whole race and ignore the fact that there are 200 people, and a whole race, around him. Through that exposure, people (like me, for example) are bound to gain an interest in bike racing in general, beyond Lance. That's all I'm saying. I'm not even saying his impact is largely positive, I don't really think that it is. I'm just saying it's not as one-sidedly negative as many people here are painting it.

 

[spike61]

good news/bad news

What attention is the sport getting in that story, BB? Seriously? The Times online reported he had crashed out of the Tour of Spain - that's how much people reporting on this care about the sport, they can't even get the name of the race right.

The attention is never on the sport, only on Armstrong - any mention of cycling in these stories is purely coincidental.

It seems that the world media is a macrocosm of this forum...whenever I look at some road cycling post, eventually people write about Lance...and because he is who he is, it stirs people's passions. And the rants go on and on and on...and outside the people watching the news and reading the paper are drawn to watching the drama unfold.

The eight percent or so that know cycling and aren't arguing about him get fed up, the two percent that rant or defend get the weight off their chests, and the other ninety percent who didn't know people suffered on bikes so others could watch and fall in love with the sport discover bicycle racing...is that good news or bad news??

 

[lookkg386]

Cycling made it on to mainstream media and it wasn't about doping, maybe that's the good news...

 

[Mellow Velo]

......and he's made it again today. The BBC no less, had an interview with his doctors.
5 inch plate and 8-12 weeks means the Giro is dead in the water.
Any complications or delay in the process and his Tour may go the same way.

 

[tifosa]

It seems that the world media is a macrocosm of this forum...whenever I look at some road cycling post, eventually people write about Lance...and because he is who he is, it stirs people's passions. And the rants go on and on and on...and outside the people watching the news and reading the paper are drawn to watching the drama unfold.

The eight percent or so that know cycling and aren't arguing about him get fed up, the two percent that rant or defend get the weight off their chests, and the other ninety percent who didn't know people suffered on bikes so others could watch and fall in love with the sport discover bicycle racing...is that good news or bad news??

Beautiful summation and very good news.

 

[Anonymous]

It seems that the world media is a macrocosm of this forum...whenever I look at some road cycling post, eventually people write about Lance...and because he is who he is, it stirs people's passions. And the rants go on and on and on...and outside the people watching the news and reading the paper are drawn to watching the drama unfold.

The eight percent or so that know cycling and aren't arguing about him get fed up, the two percent that rant or defend get the weight off their chests, and the other ninety percent who didn't know people suffered on bikes so others could watch and fall in love with the sport discover bicycle racing...is that good news or bad news??

Um.....this thread is about Armstrong......did you read the title?

 

[Angliru]

Cycling made it on to mainstream media and it wasn't about doping, maybe that's the good news...

No, Armstrong made it on to mainstream media. It just so happens that he was cycling when the accident happened. If they were to include the results of the event, and not just when an American won, then that would be an event. In semi defense of the NY Times they do have more cycling related coverage than the typical U.S. newspaper but it is miniscule when one thinks of all the major cycling events that take place between March and October that are completely ignored.

 

[lookkg386]

No, Armstrong made it on to mainstream media. It just so happens that he was cycling when the accident happened. If they were to include the results of the event, and not just when an American won, then that would be an event. In semi defense of the NY Times they do have more cycling related coverage than the typical U.S. newspaper but it is miniscule when one thinks of all the major cycling events that take place between March and October that are completely ignored.

Hmm, you do understand my tongue was planted in my cheek?

 

[Snake8]

but it is miniscule when one thinks of all the major cycling events that take place between March and October that are completely ignored.

Whats really miniscule is the number of people that follow cycling. A major cycling event is a truly minor sporting event. You can moan all you want (not just you Angry-loo) about the lance effect, the reality is that cycling is a fringe sport in most of the world. If you are a cycling fan why do you care? You've got your internet sources, you follow the sport on the net or in cycling rags, who really gives a damn if the mainstream press covers it? What does the mainstream press get right anyway?

 

[tifosa]

What does the mainstream press get right anyway?

Rhetorical, but it really does beg for an answer-but not by me!

 

[msjett]

I guess you could call it a "happy accident"-coverage for the sport and race included thanks to LA hitting the pavement.