Shouldn't Sunday Times Be Rehiring Kimmage?

[Fortyninefourteen]

Since the 1 year anniversary is forthcoming, is it just me, or should the Times strap on a pair and do the right thing?

 

[Benotti69]

Not sure he would go back.

 

[Mellow Velo]

From another forum, today:

He also basically says that if he still had a job he would use it solely to pursue his own agenda. This is why you don't have a job, Paul.

 

[Benotti69]

From another forum, today:

They funded Walsh's personal agenda for years.

 

[hrotha]

Well, in theory he wasn't fired for questioning the Armstrong myth at all, so...

 

[martinvickers]

They funded Walsh's personal agenda for years.

Walsh wrote about other things too, though. Show a bit of breadth, you get that leeway.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

You'd think that one of the cycling magazines would have tried to sign him - you know, like CN.

Oh hang on, that might mean upsetting Sky, Garmin, Saxo, the UCI etc, which would mean no more invites to drinks and press launches.

No, much better, to keep doper loving omertist hacks like Westemeyer and Friebe on the payroll than to employ a proper journalist who might actually produce articles worth reading.

*look, look, latest breakingest news, a pr release I translated from German*

Omerta is so much easier when it comes with a canapé and a free glass of UCI wine.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

You'd think that one of the cycling magazines would have tried to sign him - you know, like CN.

Oh hang on, that might mean upsetting Sky, Garmin, Saxo, the UCI etc, which would mean no more invites to drinks and press launches.

No, much better, to keep doper loving omertist hacks like Westemeyer and Friebe on the payroll than to employ a proper journalist who might actually produce articles worth reading.

*look, look, latest breakingest news, a pr release I translated from German*

Omerta is so much easier when it comes with a canapé and a free glass of UCI wine.

Paul Kimmage is not worth the seat he is out there somewhere sitting on.

Whoa ... Mrs John Murphy ---we can tell you don't mind speaking your mind..

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh wrote about other things too, though. Show a bit of breadth, you get that leeway.

So did Kimmage, Walsh covered more cycling than Kimmage.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

From another forum, today:

What the......
You 'quoted' someone's opinion from another forum?!(& didn't even link it?)

Since the 1 year anniversary is forthcoming, is it just me, or should the Times strap on a pair and do the right thing?

Yes & no.
I suppose they should not have got rid of him in the first place, but his difficulty was that some of his stories were not making it to print because of over zealous middle management.
As all publications are going through severe financial difficulties when the bean counters did a review they cut people who had not contributed (financially) to the paper.

 

[sniper]

+1, Fortyninefourteen, for raising the issue.

I'm slightly disappointed in Walsh, and perhaps also in JV, though I'm not expecting much of the latter.

Where is their (public) support of Kimmage?

JV on twitter even says he's dedicated his life to anti-doping.

Not that they're responsible for Kimmage's monthly salary, but some public support somewhere would be the least they could do.

instead i hear crickets.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

+1, Fortyninefourteen, for raising the issue.

I'm slightly disappointed in Walsh, and perhaps also in JV, though I'm not expecting much of the latter.

Where is their (public) support of Kimmage?

JV on twitter even says he's dedicated his life to anti-doping.

Not that they're responsible for Kimmage's monthly salary, but some public support somewhere would be the least they could do.

instead i hear crickets.

Don't forget Nicole Cooke, she didn't mention it in her piece.
Or David Millar - you forgot to mention him, although I am sure that was an oversight.
Or Lance, although perhaps he devoted an hour to it in the Oprah interview.

Sorry to add to you "disappointment"

 

[martinvickers]

So did Kimmage, Walsh covered more cycling than Kimmage.

Walsh covered more everything than Kimmage.

Look, Paul Kimmage himself made a point that most of his content recently was cycling doping related, and couldn't get his last four pieces past the ST lawyers - and that this had a significant effect on his redundancy there. His words, not mine.

He then goes on to say that in his next job, he'll write what he wants - which while laudible, and I'd certainly read it, doesn't necessarily fill other publications with warm feelings - remember, at the end of the day, the journo is the employee, not the employer. I wish him all the luck in the world, and our sport needs him, but I can't pretend it's not, shall we say, a predictable problem.

 

[northstar]

Kimmage retrospective on twitter today:

@PaulKimmage It is one year tomorrow since I lost my job at The Sunday Times.... profitable work this anti-doping.

Keep on shining the light on the truth Paul. Hopefully, one day it will pay the bills.

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh covered more everything than Kimmage.

Look, Paul Kimmage himself made a point that most of his content recently was cycling doping related, and couldn't get his last four pieces past the ST lawyers - and that this had a significant effect on his redundancy there. His words, not mine.

He then goes on to say that in his next job, he'll write what he wants - which while laudible, and I'd certainly read it, doesn't necessarily fill other publications with warm feelings - remember, at the end of the day, the journo is the employee, not the employer. I wish him all the luck in the world, and our sport needs him, but I can't pretend it's not, shall we say, a predictable problem.

It would appear he is content no working for Murdoch.

Kimmage retrospective on twitter today:

@PaulKimmage It is one year tomorrow since I lost my job at The Sunday Times.... profitable work this anti-doping.

Keep on shining the light on the truth Paul. Hopefully, one day it will pay the bills.

I think Paul will find more fulfillment from his work without ST editors and Lawyers worried about being sued.

 

[Benotti69]

a chap called Ciaran Lennon tweeted this

http://www.independent.ie/sport/reserving-the-right-to-applaud-403806.html

A JOURNALIST from a radio station in Philadelphia called last week on the day before the opening round of the British Open at Carnoustie. She wasn't interested in golf.

Lance Armstrong had just won the ninth stage of the Tour de France in Sestrieres. Three years after being told he might not survive cancer, the 27-year-old was leading the world's toughest sporting event by a whopping eight minutes. It was, she enthused, a truly remarkable story. Would I be willing to be interviewed on how the sport had cleaned-up its act?

``What makes you think it has,'' I replied. ``For sure, there has been some improvement but there is still much to be done. The same people in the same positions are still making decisions. Syringes are still being dumped in hotel rooms. The champions are still being exposed.''

Not sure this was really what she wanted to hear, I could sense her mood begin to deflate. ``That's interesting,'' she said, ``just let me run it past my producer and call you back.'' She never did.

This is one reason why ST wont give Kimmage his job back.

 

[Bandoblue]

I'm slightly disappointed in Walsh, and perhaps also in JV, though I'm not expecting much of the latter.

Where is their (public) support of Kimmage?

Got to admit I don't quite follow you here as applied to Walsh.

Reading Seven Deadly Sins, you see just how close Walsh and Kimmage are--somewhere between best friends and brothers. Kimmage certainly doesn't seem disappointed in Walsh.

Maybe we are tangling two things here: Kimmage's layoff, and Kimmage as a victim of UCI's attempted SLAPP suit.

Walsh had not said much of anything about the layoff, I assume, because he and Kimmage are newspaper professionals, they know blood is in the streets everywhere their profession, and they know anyone can be laid off at any moment. It sucks, but it's not malicious or willfully evil or unethical. What's to criticize?

The UCI thing is another matter entirely, and there Walsh has burned down the barn with his support on Twitter and elsewhere.

 

[nevada]

You'd think that one of the cycling magazines would have tried to sign him - you know, like CN.

Oh hang on, that might mean upsetting Sky, Garmin, Saxo, the UCI etc, which would mean no more invites to drinks and press launches.

No, much better, to keep doper loving omertist hacks like Westemeyer and Friebe on the payroll than to employ a proper journalist who might actually produce articles worth reading.

*look, look, latest breakingest news, a pr release I translated from German*

Omerta is so much easier when it comes with a canapé and a free glass of UCI wine.

But great PR if you've nothing to hide.........

 

[sniper]

Got to admit I don't quite follow you here as applied to Walsh.

Reading Seven Deadly Sins, you see just how close Walsh and Kimmage are--somewhere between best friends and brothers. Kimmage certainly doesn't seem disappointed in Walsh.

Maybe we are tangling two things here: Kimmage's layoff, and Kimmage as a victim of UCI's attempted SLAPP suit.

Walsh had not said much of anything about the layoff, I assume, because he and Kimmage are newspaper professionals, they know blood is in the streets everywhere their profession, and they know anyone can be laid off at any moment. It sucks, but it's not malicious or willfully evil or unethical. What's to criticize?

The UCI thing is another matter entirely, and there Walsh has burned down the barn with his support on Twitter and elsewhere.

haven't read 7 deadly sins.
sounds good, though, thanks.

if you don't mind me inquiring: what does Walsh say in 7DS wrt UCI?

 

[Bandoblue]

haven't read 7 deadly sins.
sounds good, though, thanks.

if you don't mind me inquiring: what does Walsh say in 7DS wrt UCI?

Nothing much, actually.

It's a particular kind of book: a first-person retelling of Walsh's own personal involvement with LA. It goes through Walsh's experiences in detail up through the publication of LA Confidential and the lawsuit against the Times, and then the narrative more or less fades out, as Walsh moves on at that point to other things (Lance to Landis was somewhat of a long-last English printing of LA Confidential, not a totally new work).

The next to last chapter hastily covers the Armstrong story from SCA depositions to USADA RD. The final chapter interviews each of his own sources for LA Confidential about their feelings now.

The UCI suit doesn't fit in this first-personal frame, and so doesn't get covered. But Walsh's and Kimmage's friendship runs like a seam through the book from first to last chapter.

 

[Mellow Velo]

haven't read 7 deadly sins.
sounds good, though, thanks.

if you don't mind me inquiring: what does Walsh say in 7DS wrt UCI?

Mmmm. From this, I'm guessing that you haven't read LAC, either.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Why would they? Few buys mainstream newspapers these days and adding Kimmage will not increase circulation unfortunately.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

While Paul Kimmage is unemployed

Paul Kimmage is not worth the seat he is out there somewhere sitting on.

Whoa ... Mrs John Murphy ---we can tell you don't mind speaking your mind..

Here's a quote from an ESPN article

Betsy Andreu was an inconvenient woman. At a time when a fawning media competed to compose paeans to Lance Armstrong (for years, I was at the forefront of that too-credulous crowd), she struck a discordant note. If we were enterprising enough to search for it, she told us, we would find that there was more to Armstrong's story than met the eye. It really wasn't about the bike.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mo...andreu-lance-armstrong/index.html?eref=sircrc

See that. It is a journalist who is big enough to recognise that he was wrong.

Has CN apologized for its coverage? No. Have Westemeyer, Wieslo, Friebe, Benson etc apologized for the things that they have written? No.

Like Armstrong they can not bring themselves to admit their failures, or their role in facilitating doping in cycling. They themselves refuse to admit that they are upholding omerta by refusing to raise questions.

These are people who either knew that they were repeating lies, or they were too stupid to see what was going on. Their conduct shows either their complete lack of a moral compass, or that they are so stupid that they should not be let out unsupervised.

Their refusal to say mea culpa, shows their complete lack of integrity and that they are still the same omertists that they ever were.

This is not to mention the Joe Papp/RR/Barrus affair which was swept under the carpet by telling us that they were waiting for 'legal advice'. A whitewash so obvious you think that Benson had been on the phone to McQuaid asking for the best way to make something unpleasant and embarrassing to go away.

While riders are sacked and suspended, while team doctors are punished, while administrators voted out, while DSs end up in court, the media sails on re-writing history, maintaining omerta, completely unaccountable for their actions. Unwilling to confront the things that they have done and their role in perpetuating the lies upon which Armstrong and others have built their careers, aiding and abetting dopers.

The nicest thing I think that can be said is that they have never found a job yet for which they were not under-qualified or lacking in the appropriate skills, intellect, integrity or moral values.

 

[Benotti69]

Armstrong is now a convenient shield to divert eyes from Leinders, Ibaguren, Katusha, Astana, Lotto, Lampre, BMC, Movistar and all the current teams who have questions to answer and right under our noses from 2012 Brailsford and Wiggins

 

[Froomador]

Here's a quote from an ESPN article

See that. It is a journalist who is big enough to recognise that he was wrong.

Has CN apologized for its coverage? No. Have Westemeyer, Wieslo, Friebe, Benson etc apologized for the things that they have written? No.

Like Armstrong they can not bring themselves to admit their failures, or their role in facilitating doping in cycling. They themselves refuse to admit that they are upholding omerta by refusing to raise questions.

These are people who either knew that they were repeating lies, or they were too stupid to see what was going on. Their conduct shows either their complete lack of a moral compass, or that they are so stupid that they should not be let out unsupervised.

Their refusal to say mea culpa, shows their complete lack of integrity and that they are still the same omertists that they ever were.

This is not to mention the Joe Papp/RR/Barrus affair which was swept under the carpet by telling us that they were waiting for 'legal advice'. A whitewash so obvious you think that Benson had been on the phone to McQuaid asking for the best way to make something unpleasant and embarrassing to go away.

While riders are sacked and suspended, while team doctors are punished, while administrators voted out, while DSs end up in court, the media sails on re-writing history, maintaining omerta, completely unaccountable for their actions. Unwilling to confront the things that they have done and their role in perpetuating the lies upon which Armstrong and others have built their careers, aiding and abetting dopers.

The nicest thing I think that can be said is that they have never found a job yet for which they were not under-qualified or lacking in the appropriate skills, intellect, integrity or moral values.

Mrs Murphy, I hear your point but are you familiar with libel laws? Something that Lance and his highly paid team of lawyers were previously rather expert at utilizing.

Whilst it would have been very nice and honorable for journalists to write fearlessly what was generally suspected via the grapevine, without proof they would simply be opening themselves and their employers for massive damages (take David Walsh and the Sunday Times for example)

Furthermore, written media is largely paid for by advertisers and media groups affiliated to politics - up until the USADA's report advertisers adored cycling's only global poster boy Lance and politicians fawned over his celebrity and public perception. Whilst editors and media owners love a good scandal, they are not so keen to damage their ad revenues nor receive "calls from above".

So it's all well and good talking about moral compasses and journalistic integrity but in some scenarios the only thing such values bring you is unemployment (like a certain Mr Kimmage).

Omerta is driven by scenarios such as the above which often involve practical/commercial realities of putting food on the table. It's not in any way right but then there are some very compelling reasons that have allowed it to silence those around cycling for so long.