• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Paid bloggers to control the main media stories?

Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Visit site
As the news is hitting the major media what do you think the Lance spin doctors' approach is?

Same old same old. Discredit the whistleblower (especially the new ones not seen before) and USADA in the early comments. Those are the important ones to hit... few people read lower down...

Let's see if we see a pattern during the next 2 days.

Here's the first article found, reeks of inside job, no ordinary cycling fan this one:
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/10/10/lance-armstrong-report-michael-barry-canadian-cyclist/

"So...Michael Barry has admtted he is nothing more than a hypoctritical two faced clown and actively decieved anyone in the world who read his articles that he was above personal dopping in cylce competitions.
Now we are to believe him when he says he wants to win peoples trust back?.
It appears Barry must still be on some type of Mediction perhaps mind altering.. Only 48 hours ago most of his readers thought he wasn't a problem - 48 hours later he wants to regain trust?.
Sorry Mr. Barry wake up and smell the coffee
Being a doping athlete like you is like being a bad cop
Once your caught, dissappear you will never be trusted again. Even what such cops say can never be trusted..
Or are we to think "hey that cop never got caught he just admitted it after all these years" so now we will trust him again.
So Mr. Barry what kind of deal did you cut for coming forward? Why should we believe you when you are "Coming clean" for personal reward from your prosecutors?
Yes you are indeed the type of amoral athlete that would take steroids. The type that would imply also that the USADA has powers over international sports that it does not have - so that it can produce hearsay that it will not allow to be cross examined.
The director of the USADA is a hero hater who hates Lance Amrstrong. The hatred is so great that the USADA is abusing its influence just to attack armstroing in the court of public opinion - using any "tools" they can leverage.
You know the type.. . "
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Visit site
As I started the thread and checked the media coverage over the past few hours, I have come to conclude the spin doctors are trying but IT'S JUST TOO BIG!!!!

1750 articles last 12 hours on google news search terms "lance armstrong doping"

This story is going off and not controllable by the LA spin team. You'd need a team of 100's of bloggers to keep up. Tygart has done a superb job with the 200 page public file.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Visit site
A real BINGO by Richard Hinds from Sydney Morning Herald this AM.

"Armstrong and his lawyers have used every club in the bag. They have claimed victimisation of various kinds - including by French journalists supposedly jealous of American success. They have belittled government agencies and branded their accusers liars. Most shamefully, Armstrong has used his cancer charity, and his own story of cancer survival, to create confusion among the naive and the slavishly devoted who fail to distinguish the drug cheat from the great benefactor."

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling...catches-up-with-armstrong-20121011-27ett.html
 
Oct 8, 2012
237
1
0
Visit site
Armstrong's focus is on public relations, not facts of the case. All the talking points have been fleshed out with his PR firm in conjunction with his lawyers.

There are multiple bloggers, posters, moderators of forums, editorialists, reporters, etc that are sympathetic to the Armstrong cancer story that have either been contacted directly by Armstrong or Livestrong and thanked and encouraged to "keep up the good fight".

Armstrong's strategy is to win through the public. Livestrong has crashed multiple articles that allow for public comments at the bottom of the articles.
 
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
Visit site
the bloggers that I have seen who defend have not yet read the 200-page document and their comments are easy to distinguish for real people who have read it.
 
Jul 6, 2012
133
0
0
Visit site
Those tricks just aren't going to work any more, not against a chorus of voices.

Armstrong's only chance lies in the likelihood that so many influential people tied themselves to his name that they do what they can to bury this in order to protect themselves.
 
May 2, 2010
1,692
0
0
Visit site
Tinman said:
A real BINGO by Richard Hinds from Sydney Morning Herald this AM.

"Armstrong and his lawyers have used every club in the bag. They have claimed victimisation of various kinds - including by French journalists supposedly jealous of American success. They have belittled government agencies and branded their accusers liars. Most shamefully, Armstrong has used his cancer charity, and his own story of cancer survival, to create confusion among the naive and the slavishly devoted who fail to distinguish the drug cheat from the great benefactor."

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling...catches-up-with-armstrong-20121011-27ett.html

I read about 60 or so comments on another article posted by smh at http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling...ndeniable-proof-of-doping-20121011-27e79.html. Whilst there are some in denial, a majority seemed to indicate they thought he doped.
 
Jul 16, 2012
201
0
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
This.
. . . . . .
I just watched ABC the Drum (Australia current affairs national broadcaster) that ran a piece about 8 mins live discussion. The program was bombarded with pro livestrong propaganda tweets televised across the bottom one after the other - these guys are definitely organised. Had to be seen to be believed.
 
Jul 16, 2012
201
0
0
Visit site
Tinman said:
A real BINGO by Richard Hinds from Sydney Morning Herald this AM.

"Armstrong and his lawyers have used every club in the bag. They have claimed victimisation of various kinds - including by French journalists supposedly jealous of American success. They have belittled government agencies and branded their accusers liars. Most shamefully, Armstrong has used his cancer charity, and his own story of cancer survival, to create confusion among the naive and the slavishly devoted who fail to distinguish the drug cheat from the great benefactor."

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling...catches-up-with-armstrong-20121011-27ett.html
Just saw an excerpt from the 4 Corners program due to air on Monday night 15 Oct 830pm AEST local time - here in Australia for the national broadcaster ABC . They have an Emma O'Reilly interview FINALLY some decent journalism - and she doesn't hold back!
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Visit site
Paid bloggers didn't work. Deleting your on-line discretions is now required.

Check reputation.com, the company which Howard Bragman has just joined.

Bragman states on CNN that Armstrong's legacy may survive the accusations... Hmmm... touting for business or already in the game?

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/11/us/armstrong-doping-legacy/index.html

http://www.reputation.com//

Howard and similar companies are likely to be pretty busy right now as the past is catching up. I wonder if team Sky has realized this and for how long already. Remarkable how empty the wiki profiles of Brailsford and Yates are... Seems logical I guess if your parent company is Murdoch controlled and the past is murky?