Lance Armstrong - Talking Points Articles

Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Noticing more of these cropping up. The same talking points, the same rationalizers and apologists line of thought.

I submit we track these and cross reference how many repeat, word for work, the line by line repetition that surely is being shuffled out by the PS spin machine.

Here are the ones I have found but there are others in current threads. Add yours so we can being to assemble the common themes.

http://www.statepress.com/2011/01/20/devil-dish-jan-21/

http://kevin-blackistone.fanhouse.com/2011/01/20/lance-armstrongs-big-win-not-on-bike/

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/2011/01/20/lets_end_the_lance_armstrong_witch_hunt.php

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-problem-with-the-lance-armstrong-doping-investigation-2011-1

http://www.cbssports.com/general/story/14577379/lances-good-works-matter-above-all-else-even-steroids

Truly an amazing exercise in mobilizing the press and blogosphere in an effort to wage damage control. Sorry it won't work, too tough to get traction when your wheels are spinning in axle deep allegations of the felonious nature.
 
Good News

I tried some odd search phrases and found nothing new.

I found some good news. As of 10:30 PM PST, the poll "If the allegations against Lance Armstrong are proven, how will you regard him?" returned a 56% negative. 35% selected 'the same' 967 votes so far.

That's okay! My guess is in the next few hours those numbers will flip and 'the same' will be the new winner. Public Strategies can't let that one go.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/early-lead/2011/01/lance_armstrong_says_he_has_no.html
 
Sep 22, 2009
137
0
0
Colm.Murphy said:
Only read this one and it made my blood boil! :eek: Can we find the dumbest BS article ever? This would be up there. It said cycling is a boring sport, who cares if he used steroids. Only baseball matters worldwide. Still he is somehow the most important athlete? Because he has raised money for cancer research?(wasn't it awareness?:rolleyes:) Come on..

If there is no secret pr-campaign going on, I would be amazed!
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
I've posted a few to the Sports Illustrated thread the past two days. Could we maybe have the article titles above the links please?

I've also seen a few that mean to be informational, but to me are a gray area. An example would be the ones questioning the HemAssist allegation based on effectiveness. For one, it could obviously have been used in conjunction with other substances and blood transfusions for performance and to end up with acceptable test vales. But it distracts from the reality that if he had access to it, possessed it and used it, he's broken laws. And if they conducted efficacy studies on products like this years later, that information obviously wasn't available at the time he was looking for an edge. So articles dismissing the allegation without addressing the information available at the time give the wrong impression. I'm sure lots of guys have tried things that ended up not working as they hoped
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Bump to keep track of where the PR needle is moving WRT Lance.

Not as many, "We'd still love him anyways" article as I thought.

Fabiani and PS must be losing grip on the situation.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
I posted this last night on a different thread but it got buried under the troll fest. I didn't see it posted here yet so I'll offer it up. I think this one is particularly significant because it shows just how far Lance's reach is. This is the TV outlet for most Americans when it comes to cycling (which is why I so much more enjoy watching the Giro and other races on Universal Sports) but what's on display here is nothing more than a mouthpiece for someone who is currently under a federal investigation.

Granville57 said:
Is Bobke so truly pathetic that he thinks we are all complete and total morons? :mad:

I transcribed Bob Roll's ridiculous response to the SI article so that we can be clear about what he said and parse those words if need be. No wonder very few people want to speak openly about doping when this kind of myth-reinforcement is what they have to contend with.
http://www.versus.com/cycling/videos/bobkes-beef-yellow-jersey-vs-yellow-journalism/in-stream/sport/cycling/sort/most-recent/

And since the OP mentioned "word for word"...here it is, verbatim:


"Well, in recent weeks, the rumor mill has been grinding away...and it was said that Sports Illustrated had a huge exposé on the career of Lance Armstrong, most specifically the recent allegations—I guess they’re about a year-old by now—of Floyd Landis.

"And I found the expectations to be riding high that this uh, article by Sports Illustrated was going to be a huge, new set of revelations. Unfortunately, very disappointingly, Sports Illustrated didn’t have any new information, and they have rehashed all of the testimony, and all of the statements we’ve heard before, from all of the principal players.

"Nothing new under the sun, and I think that Sports Illustrated might have confused the Yellow Jersey for 'yellow journalism.' A horrible story.

"I’m not sure if the authors were payed by the word but they should spread the wealth around because they didn’t use their words, they used the words of people we’ve already heard from. And uh…nothing new on that front. Very disappointing that Sports Illustrated would uh, try to sell some papers because of this. Another round of accusations that Lance Armstrong and the U.S. Postal and Discovery teams…it doesn’t seem as if there’s anything new under the sun there.

"We’ll have to wait and see what uh, Jeff Novitsky and the “FDA” can come up with. But so far, after a <chuckle> long, researched and rumored article, nothing from <chuckle> Sports Illustrated. They need to go back to the drawing board and uh, look for some facts that maybe we could talk about." - Bob Roll
 
Granville57 said:
"We’ll have to wait and see what uh, Jeff Novitsky and the “FDA” can come up with. But so far, after a <nervous laugh> long, researched and rumored article, nothing from <nervous laugh> Sports Illustrated. They need to go back to the drawing board and uh, look for some facts that maybe we could talk about." - Bob Roll
I fixed that for you.;)
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Colm.Murphy said:
Bump to keep track of where the PR needle is moving WRT Lance.

Not as many, "We'd still love him anyways" article as I thought.

Fabiani and PS must be losing grip on the situation.
Totally agree - although they were always in difficult as the first 'leak' was through the WSJ and was followed on the MSM.

The only articles still believing in Lance are in hidden away sites or even worthless blogs.
And as we have seen on this forum the mantra has changed, it is either suspend judgment until conviction (that day will come) or to say he has done "so much good".
I think it is only a matter of time before a publication starts searching through his financial interests and the LAF.
 
May 14, 2009
147
0
0
Granville57 said:
I posted this last night on a different thread but it got buried under the troll fest. I didn't see it posted here yet so I'll offer it up. I think this one is particularly significant because it shows just how far Lance's reach is. This is the TV outlet for most Americans when it comes to cycling (which is why I so much more enjoy watching the Giro and other races on Universal Sports) but what's on display here is nothing more than a mouthpiece for someone who is currently under a federal investigation.


http://www.versus.com/cycling/videos/bobkes-beef-yellow-jersey-vs-yellow-journalism/in-stream/sport/cycling/sort/most-recent/

And since the OP mentioned "word for word"...here it is, verbatim:


"Well, in recent weeks, the rumor mill has been grinding away...and it was said that Sports Illustrated had a huge exposé on the career of Lance Armstrong, most specifically the recent allegations—I guess they’re about a year-old by now—of Floyd Landis.

"And I found the expectations to be riding high that this uh, article by Sports Illustrated was going to be a huge, new set of revelations. Unfortunately, very disappointingly, Sports Illustrated didn’t have any new information, and they have rehashed all of the testimony, and all of the statements we’ve heard before, from all of the principal players.

"Nothing new under the sun, and I think that Sports Illustrated might have confused the Yellow Jersey for 'yellow journalism.' A horrible story.

"I’m not sure if the authors were payed by the word but they should spread the wealth around because they didn’t use their words, they used the words of people we’ve already heard from. And uh…nothing new on that front. Very disappointing that Sports Illustrated would uh, try to sell some papers because of this. Another round of accusations that Lance Armstrong and the U.S. Postal and Discovery teams…it doesn’t seem as if there’s anything new under the sun there.

"We’ll have to wait and see what uh, Jeff Novitsky and the “FDA” can come up with. But so far, after a <chuckle> long, researched and rumored article, nothing from <chuckle> Sports Illustrated. They need to go back to the drawing board and uh, look for some facts that maybe we could talk about." - Bob Roll
I have really grown to hate Bob Roll. He can't actually believe this nonsense.

It's going to be great theater to watch the spinning on Versus this summer when the indictments start falling.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
I fixed that for you.;)
Excellent work. :)
------------

Watching that CBS Sports link from the OP is incredibly disturbing. It so embodies everything that is morally wrong with the "acceptance" crowd.

One noteworthy argument always seems to be left out of that stance. This idea of "good deeds" overlooks the fact that we'll never know what Jan Ullrich may have done with his riches and fame had he won 7, or 8...or 10 TdFs. We'll never know.

What good deeds might have sprung forth from Floyd if he had attained the fame of fortune of his made-for-hollywood TdF victory? We'll never know. He cheated too, so why isn't it alright? Because he didn't go on to cheat and win more?

This twisted assumption that StrongArm is the only one capable of providing...(what is it he provides again?) "something" to the masses is an assault on reason. And what is also conveniently ignored, is the concept of LA having built up all these charitable "notions" for the very reason of providing a protective wall to hide behind when criticism came his way.

Yeah, they always seem to leave that part out.
Great moral lesson to pass on to the next generation: Lie and cheat all you want, just make sure to lie to everyone, set up a "charity," and make tons and tons of money along the way. Then everyone will live happily ever after.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
palmerq said:
if it wasnt for his puncture and crash /insert below/ he would have finished 3rd again you know ........................... hahahaha
...and the fact that we were simply scared out of our wits to dope...
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Excellent thread. Armstrong has a long history of dissemination talking points, The Coyle fraud, Landis is nuts, Greg is nuts, Betsy is nuts (And fat)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
42x16ss The Clinic 8
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY