Team Sky and BC Books.

[Savant12]

Come on, guys. This is a real stretch. Books about cyclists and cycling are NOTHING to do with doping. This thread shouldn't be here, and if it were anyone but The Hitch who had started it, it would have been moved some time ago.

This is ridiculous. So The Hitch posts something anti-Sky, and people object, and then the anti-Sky brigade say "ah, but that's because you're a Sky apologist". How are we to judge whether anyone is doping by how many books they produce. And Cavendish?

Everyone knows (at least, those without blinkers) that, for a lot of those in sport, it is a short career. It may look like you're cashing in when you're 20-30, but when your career is over at 40, it's a long time until you can draw your pension at 65 or whatever.

The thread began by discussing the scope of Sky/BC's literary presence, then started to talk about the authors, and their motivations. Then JimmyFingers complained that it was another sky bashing thread, which sent the thread into 4 pages of the pros and cons of discussing the pros and cons of sky.

If we stopped posts like this, we could go back to talking about the profits seen by authors, publishers, and the riders themselves. We could talk about why or why don't other teams and riders publish to such a large extent. We could talk about other rider's books, their authors, and how their motivation compares.

But no, go ahead derailing this thread by claiming that the thread is derailing from real conversation.

Your post describes what should have happened in the discussion about Team Sky related books. However, it is clear from Hitch's OP that he didn't want to make the comparison with other riders [not Sky], teams [not Sky] and support personnel [not Sky] but to fan the flames of the continuing Sky doping circus that The Clinic is turning into.

Now, I love a good circus performance because it is fun to see the clowns in action riding around on their tiny bikes but after a while the act gets boring when they can't come up with new material and they just end up repeating the same old tired act ad nauseam.

We could go ahead and discuss something different but like every good book the allusion of a global conspiracy is too good to put down.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Re:

I dont see so many defending Contador, but as MSTR put it so well;

"We're tired of being treated like children. We're tired of the arrogance carried by riders and teams as they lead fans by their whimsy into believing a fiction.

That is what this thread is about. It is about a team, who just like any other, is up to no good. But unlike any other, is working so hard, and so successfully, at shoving mistruths, myths and propaganda down our throats. It does so at an oppressive scale"

A fan wouldn't find it oppressive, they would revel in it and they obviously do and blindly defend it and call others who dont haters....

Armstrong part deux.

agree with that. but I also like to think with my own brain, and not pay attention to that. instead of getting angry, ignore that. and I root for Sky (a big % of that comes from the clinic obsession for them), I am blocked by Froome, and never bought their books.
I think not paying attention to the British Sky fans and the Sky narrative prepared for them (just as not paying attention to my fellow Italians Aru/nibali worshippers) is the best way not to get angry and pissed about ANY fecking word these teams "try to show down our throats"

Nibali certainly does seem to be pushing a BS I am proof cycling is clean narrative.

Aru I don't think he is. Hes constantly openly heroworshipping contador. Contador who's still maintaining the illusion of having never doped

That's at least several steps down from sky, who allegedly can't even bear to look at pictures of dopers so tear them out.

But I'm writing to ask you pastronef, since I've seen bits of pieces of rais giro shows but not all of them, when Stefano, who we all know doped to win that giro and certainly wasn't clean when he was flying away in the mountains in his late 30's, talks on those giro shows, does he mention doping and do they claim it's all clean now and do they identify Aru as a new clean talent, or do they just talk about the race?

I understand what you say. surely British television and Eurosport UK get on your nerves more that the Rai guys do to me. agree with that side of the story

I must say it is all very subjective
If I see another book coming out or a new Rapha jersey in the colours of Spain-Italy-France flag, I click on the next page and see the news or the weather, or de brabantse pijl, or I go riding, or have a coffee.

i dont get mad at that and suddenly write a tweet/post about it. laisser tomber, dont care.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

Yes, that is true, but if Sky didn't exist there would be other people winning...Nibali and Contador, all implicated in some way and all maintaining their cleanliness.

.

Quintana actually, but I get it, that doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

I dont see so many defending Contador, but as MSTR put it so well;

"We're tired of being treated like children. We're tired of the arrogance carried by riders and teams as they lead fans by their whimsy into believing a fiction.

That is what this thread is about. It is about a team, who just like any other, is up to no good. But unlike any other, is working so hard, and so successfully, at shoving mistruths, myths and propaganda down our throats. It does so at an oppressive scale"

A fan wouldn't find it oppressive, they would revel in it and they obviously do and blindly defend it and call others who dont haters....

Armstrong part deux.

agree with that. but I also like to think with my own brain, and not pay attention to that. instead of getting angry, ignore that. and I root for Sky (a big % of that comes from the clinic obsession for them), I am blocked by Froome, and never bought their books.
I think not paying attention to the British Sky fans and the Sky narrative prepared for them (just as not paying attention to my fellow Italians Aru/nibali worshippers) is the best way not to get angry and pissed about ANY fecking word these teams "try to show down our throats"

Nibali certainly does seem to be pushing a BS I am proof cycling is clean narrative.

Aru I don't think he is. Hes constantly openly heroworshipping contador. Contador who's still maintaining the illusion of having never doped

That's at least several steps down from sky, who allegedly can't even bear to look at pictures of dopers so tear them out.

But I'm writing to ask you pastronef, since I've seen bits of pieces of rais giro shows but not all of them, when Stefano, who we all know doped to win that giro and certainly wasn't clean when he was flying away in the mountains in his late 30's, talks on those giro shows, does he mention doping and do they claim it's all clean now and do they identify Aru as a new clean talent, or do they just talk about the race?

I understand what you say. surely British television and Eurosport UK get on your nerves more that the Rai guys do to me. agree with that side of the story

I must say it is all very subjective
If I see another book coming out or a new Rapha jersey in the colours of Spain-Italy-France flag, I click on the next page and see the news or the weather, or de brabantse pijl, or I go riding, or have a coffee.

i dont get mad at that and suddenly write a tweet/post about it. laisser tomber, dont care.

oh I don't watch British es and haven't for years for precisely that reason.

Laisser tomber as you say, there are far worse injustices in the world.

Btw I was legitimately asking the question with garzeli as I didn't know. Do they never mention doping and cleanliness on the giro doping shows in Italy? Like Spain, does the sport media in Italy act as if doping doesn't exist?

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

.....snipped for Brevity...........



the media distrust of Astana didn't just pop out of nowhere. And by the same token, Sky wouldn't have come up with have the stuff they have if Wiggins and Froome hadn't been subjected to media distrust! It is no different.

the media distrust!!!!!!!!!hahahahaha. Foreign team caught working with doping doctor, media go big time on story.

(sky) team caught hiring doping doctor, but only for saddles sores and only weighing riders!!!!Never mind using the death of a soigneur to justify hiring Leinders.

Wiggins and Froome came from the gruppetto to win! And just after Armstrong and the reasoned decision. Hacks were going to look stupid not asking questions and none really asked any hard questions or did any in depth research because if they did it, doping would be the headlines.

There you have the narrative that grinds on fans of cycling that can see through the BS.

Astana are no different than sky, pro cycling team doing what all pro cycling teams do, which is use doping as part of their makeup to try and win races. But Astana are the bad boys and Sky are the good guys.

Sky train on Teide and call out no tests as they leave knowing Astana are there for another week and people think oh sky are clean guys. Sky thoroughly deserve all the kicking they get.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I dont see so many defending Contador, but as MSTR put it so well;

"We're tired of being treated like children. We're tired of the arrogance carried by riders and teams as they lead fans by their whimsy into believing a fiction.

That is what this thread is about. It is about a team, who just like any other, is up to no good. But unlike any other, is working so hard, and so successfully, at shoving mistruths, myths and propaganda down our throats. It does so at an oppressive scale"

A fan wouldn't find it oppressive, they would revel in it and they obviously do and blindly defend it and call others who dont haters....

Armstrong part deux.

agree with that. but I also like to think with my own brain, and not pay attention to that. instead of getting angry, ignore that. and I root for Sky (a big % of that comes from the clinic obsession for them), I am blocked by Froome, and never bought their books.
I think not paying attention to the British Sky fans and the Sky narrative prepared for them (just as not paying attention to my fellow Italians Aru/nibali worshippers) is the best way not to get angry and pissed about ANY fecking word these teams "try to show down our throats"

Nibali certainly does seem to be pushing a BS I am proof cycling is clean narrative.

Aru I don't think he is. Hes constantly openly heroworshipping contador. Contador who's still maintaining the illusion of having never doped

That's at least several steps down from sky, who allegedly can't even bear to look at pictures of dopers so tear them out.

But I'm writing to ask you pastronef, since I've seen bits of pieces of rais giro shows but not all of them, when Stefano, who we all know doped to win that giro and certainly wasn't clean when he was flying away in the mountains in his late 30's, talks on those giro shows, does he mention doping and do they claim it's all clean now and do they identify Aru as a new clean talent, or do they just talk about the race?

I understand what you say. surely British television and Eurosport UK get on your nerves more that the Rai guys do to me. agree with that side of the story

I must say it is all very subjective
If I see another book coming out or a new Rapha jersey in the colours of Spain-Italy-France flag, I click on the next page and see the news or the weather, or de brabantse pijl, or I go riding, or have a coffee.

i dont get mad at that and suddenly write a tweet/post about it. laisser tomber, dont care.

oh I don't watch British es and haven't for years for precisely that reason.

Laisser tomber as you say, there are far worse injustices in the world.

Btw I was legitimately asking the question with garzeli as I didn't know. Do they never mention doping and cleanliness on the giro doping shows in Italy? Like Spain, does the sport media in Italy act as if doping doesn't exist?

I have not heard nor seen RAI doing anything on Italians doping. They dont not during Il Giro. They welcome riders, the nice guys back on to Processo alla tappa regurlarly after doping bans. They used Cassani as a co-commentator and now Garzelli, also Salvodelli rode as a motoreporter during the race. Cipo is huge deal in Italy and regurlary seen on RAI around il Giro.

If you post on a forum during a race, you get to read comments on the various national commentary situations during races. Most seem pretty biased towards home talent.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

Come on, guys. This is a real stretch. Books about cyclists and cycling are NOTHING to do with doping.

You are aware that the number 1 theme throughout several of the Sky books (ITS, TC, M:HDBRTW) is "Sky would never dope because..."

Bit of a stretch to say they have "NOTHING" to do with doping when thats pretty much what they are about.

This is ridiculous. So The Hitch posts something anti-Sky, and people object, and then the anti-Sky brigade say "ah, but that's because you're a Sky apologist".

I just searched "Sky apologist" in the clinic and the last hit I found is from over 2 months ago. Certainly not this thread.

How are we to judge whether anyone is doping by how many books they produce. And Cavendish?

You are not. See mstr's post. Or hrotha's post.

Edit: actually, number of books produced can be a good indicator of doping. Because number of books produced is heavily linked to success and success is heavily linked to doping.
And secondly because since those who are anti doping are ostracized at the top (since the top is still controlled by former dopers and doping enablers), they would possibly lack the connections to get too many books through.

But that is not the point of this thread.

It may look like you're cashing in when you're 20-30, but when your career is over at 40, it's a long time until you can draw your pension at 65 or whatever.

Again, its not really the point of the thread, but for the record, several of the protagonist and main profiters from these books are not in their mid 20's, and have stable jobs. David Millar, Dave Brailsford, Rod Ellingworth.

And if you read the thread, and the clinic in general, you would know that the problem is not so much them cashing in on their position, but filling the books with lies.

The Hitch
The Hitch
The Hitch

ball not man

 

[wendybnt]

Re: Re:

Yes, that is true, but if Sky didn't exist there would be other people winning...Nibali and Contador, all implicated in some way and all maintaining their cleanliness.

.

Quintana actually, but I get it, that doesn't fit the narrative.

If Quintana won, what do you think he would be asked, and what do you think his reply would be. How do you think he would get to win? Bread and water?

But anyway, lets leave it there.

 

[bobbins]

BSkyBs former Head of Cycling posted on Facebook earlier that it is disgraceful that money is being made out of the Armstrong saga. I'm not sure he saw the irony.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Yes, that is true, but if Sky didn't exist there would be other people winning...Nibali and Contador, all implicated in some way and all maintaining their cleanliness.

.

Quintana actually, but I get it, that doesn't fit the narrative.

If Quintana won, what do you think he would be asked, and what do you think his reply would be. How do you think he would get to win? Bread and water?

But anyway, lets leave it there.

I have no issue with riders denying doping when asked about it. I do have an issue with riders/teams forcing their "cleanliness" down everyone's throats and insulting the fans' intelligence.

 

[carton]

Re:

Nibali would never have pushed the clean agenda that much hadn't it been for the Astana license debacle and the general (media) distrust towards his team. He didn't start out selling himself as the new "black". Unless of course he did in italian media but I doubt there was as much a good story to tell as with the Sky team.

Oh, have to disagree strongly. This has been alluded to in the last few posts but I'm going to come out with it.

Spaniards and Italians usually don't say much about doping. But Nibali in particular has been selling himself as cleaner than a whistle all his life. His father would kill him (literally making it sound like it an honor killing would be a legitimate possibility) if he doped, the full court press.

Quintana is a absolute national hero as well. As in, they actually gave him the Colombian equivalent of the medal of honor / Victoria Cross. Colombians are convinced that they're on pan y agua, or actually aguaepanela and bocadillos. Every hardcore Colombian cycling fan thinks that there was no 80's and 10's boom, just a 90's and 00's drought because Colombians don't do EPO.

No current french rider dopes. Not one. If they they are suspect it's because they lived outside of France for too long and they're not really french anymore.

The Sky thing is kid's stuff, really. The marginal gains spiel grates, for sure, but IMHO they're far less mythologized in the British press than their equivalents in their national coverage. Sky do seem to have better international media savvy (though after this Tour I'm not so sure), and apparently Brits like reading a lot of ghostwritten books.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Nibali would never have pushed the clean agenda that much hadn't it been for the Astana license debacle and the general (media) distrust towards his team. He didn't start out selling himself as the new "black". Unless of course he did in italian media but I doubt there was as much a good story to tell as with the Sky team.

Oh, have to disagree strongly. This has been alluded to in the last few posts but I'm going to come out with it.

Spaniards and Italians usually don't say much about doping. But Nibali in particular has been selling himself as cleaner than a whistle all his life. His father would kill him (literally making it sound like it an honor killing would be a legitimate possibility) if he doped, the full court press.

Quintana is a absolute national hero as well. As in, they actually gave him the Colombian equivalent of the medal of honor / Victoria Cross. Colombians are convinced that they're on pan y agua, or actually aguaepanela and bocadillos. Every hardcore Colombian cycling fan thinks that there was no 80's and 10's boom, just a 90's and 00's drought because Colombians don't do EPO.

No current french rider dopes. Not one. If they they are suspect it's because they lived outside of France for too long and they're not really french anymore.

The Sky thing is kid's stuff, really. The marginal gains spiel grates, for sure, but IMHO they're far less mythologized in the British press than their equivalents in their national coverage. Sky do seem to have better international media savvy (though after this Tour I'm not so sure), and apparently Brits like reading a lot of ghostwritten books.

So what does that make their fans? Babies!

Sky have just taken USPS approach and refined it. The excuses from Armstrong where bigger heart, bigger lung capacity, bigger veins, cancer changed him, harder training, attention to equipment, attention to detail, ahead of the curve. etc etc

We all know sky's excuses so no need to list them.

I bet if someone had the time or inclination to compare, i guess Sky have the most publications out related to their team than any other and would be only second to Merckx.

Not a conspiracy, just cashing in before it gets pulled by sky or someone talks..........

 

[The Hitch]

Eh, Wiggins and Brunyeelsford got knighthoods. So I don't see how Quintana getting the Colombian equivalent is any bigger. In Colombia they do generally reward cycling success, Nairo got an audience with Santos when he won the Tour de Lavenir and same for Chavez.

The idea that all Colombians think Quintana is all clean, and all french people think French riders are clean, may be true, but I doubt it since not all Brits think Sky are clean and we have at least a few Colombians and French posters on here that already disprove that theory.

In either case, what the sheeple think is one thing. The sellout journos inventing fictional, offensive tales about Rod Ellingworth and Shane Sutton setting up anti doping teams in the mid 2000's because they are so commited to anti doping, is quite another.

I'm a little scared about how full *** the Colombian press might go if Quintana wins the Tour, but for now, I don't see Quintana's domestiques and soigneurs coming out with autobiographies.

When Quintana and his managment start claiming for example that they had the world's top psychiatrists and researchers spend weeks analyzing Alejandro Valverde's mentality and his history, and came to the conclusion that he has always been clean and fits a "Zero Tolerance Policy", come back to me with Quintana.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Yes, that is true, but if Sky didn't exist there would be other people winning...Nibali and Contador, all implicated in some way and all maintaining their cleanliness.

Nibali "I am a symbol of clean sport".

I really don't get the obsession and anger. I just don't pay any attention to Sky promo stuff. I don't watch the tv programmes, I don't read the books. I don't read the Brailsford interviews. Its really simple. I didn't with Armstrong either. In fact, I didn't really watch him race either. Its the same story though. If Armstrong hadn't existed, Ullrich would have won.

Nothing has changed. Sky are cheating other cheats. Stop with this BS like they are the first or only team to have ever doped, and the only team to be pretending to be clean.

I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles etc. Same ****, different day.

You don't, but sooo many others do. And that's the problem. You don't believe the hype, and it's good to see. The sport suffers when it appeals to people who do.

You can compare the Nibali's statement to a Sky statement, but comparing that statement with the media machine of BC and sky don't compare when it comes to influencing the market, fans and the sport.

I can't dispute that. Its true. Sky have a media machine that is at the same time awe-inspiring and nauseating.

But it doesn't actually matter.

The bottom line is if Sky didn't exist, another cheat would still win. If you fixate on one team or rider the problem will just keep recurring. We've seen this for nearly 20 years since Festina. Landis, Armstrong being the biggest examples, and after each of their exposures things just went straight back to normal immediately after. If Sky go down, another doper will win. Same old, same old. trying to make out that one team/rider are the embodiment of cheating just ensures that it will continue.

The bottom line is the clinic discusses all doping andnot just cycling either. Sky get so much 'traffic', because their 'fans' or employees come in here to obfuscate the obvious.

Before Sky there was Armstrong. But you know that and also that we have hundreds of threads on others and other teams but choose to pretend otherwise.

If you think it is same old same old why defend sky, why try and make sky look like the victims......i call trolling.

 

[wendybnt]

So what does a non-doping sports team do to be better than their opponents, Benotti? (any sport will do)

And if this non-doping sports team was paid for by a media organisation that wanted to get maximum exposure and associated kudos what would they do?

See the problem? It wouldn't look any different.

If you can get yourself out of the mindset that everything and anything Sky do is purely about doping just for one minute you might manage to see sense.

By the way, quit with the childish accusations of "trolling". If you don't want to discuss with me then don't, but don't try and draw me into your stupid forum games.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

So what does a non-doping sports team do to be better than their opponents, Benotti? (any sport will do)

Nothing. Doping wins everytime.

And if this non-doping sports team was paid for by a media organisation that wanted to get maximum exposure and associated kudos what would they do?

Are you trying to say that teamsky are are clean but behave in such amnner because their sponsors are a global media corporationlacking morals.....oh dear!

See the problem?

the problem with Sky is they dope, they started out knowing they would have to dope, but that 2 of the biggest anti doping journalists were working for a murdoch owned paper. If Walsh and Kimamge didn't work at ST, i think the narrative would have been hugely different for teamsky. But Sky have used it to their advantage, Walsh plays ball and Kimmage was jettisoned. Another reason they get taken to town in the clinic

If you can get yourself out of the mindset that everything and anything Sky do is purely about doping just for one minute you might manage to see sense.

Doping is part of the fabric of the sport. That cannot be taken out of the mindset. Why bother taking any other position. I am sorry you don't believe in miracles.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Re:

Btw I was legitimately asking the question with garzeli as I didn't know. Do they never mention doping and cleanliness on the giro doping shows in Italy? Like Spain, does the sport media in Italy act as if doping doesn't exist?

they rarely speak about doping. very rarely.
they say sometimes "problems" "suspicions" etc
not heard a word about Ulissi's problems

 

[wendybnt]

Benotti.You haven't understood a single thing I've said have you. It isn't about whether Sky dope or don't dope, its about what the purpose of the publicity is.

Here is an amazon link to a whole bunch of books about Lewis Hamilton

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=lewis+hamilton

Are we agreed that he probably doesn't dope? So in the absence of dope, what do you think those books are all about, and why do you think Hamilton's team and sponsors would be pretty pleased about it?

If you still don't get it, please don't bother replying.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re:

So what does a non-doping sports team do to be better than their opponents, Benotti? (any sport will do)

And if this non-doping sports team was paid for by a media organisation that wanted to get maximum exposure and associated kudos what would they do?

See the problem? It wouldn't look any different.

If you can get yourself out of the mindset that everything and anything Sky do is purely about doping just for one minute you might manage to see sense.

By the way, quit with the childish accusations of "trolling". If you don't want to discuss with me then don't, but don't try and draw me into your stupid forum games.

So just because the media relations wing of Team Sky is doing their job really well means we should be okay with it? Marlboro cigarettes also had really strong advertising, and it was perfectly legitimate to question the way they achieved that.

To answer your questions, for one, the hypothetical non-doping team would tell the truth. A team with integrity wouldn't belittle their competition.. Sky's PR and their riders' books are filled with half truths and contradictions, and not just in the "artistic license" type. You can take a few angles, whether you want to go with perpetuating a stereotype with "poor African who can only afford to race in sand shoes", or the deceitful myth that any shmuck could have been a TDF champion if they just gave up nutella, which is implied in the way they tell the "he is the world's best talent but only Sky was able to figure that out". Selling a myopic view of marginal gains, that these gains matter so much it's okay to forget about things that actually matter like time penalties for breaking rules or not wasting money on an illegal RV. Add to that the poor sportsmanship of implying that their competition are all amateurs in their training, organization, and commitment.

It isn't about whether Sky dope or don't dope, its about what the purpose of the publicity is.

Many of us think the reason for the narrative and half truths is to hide doping. But if it isn't, then what is the purpose of the myths, contradictions, and arrogance?

 

[wendybnt]

Re: Re:

Many of us think the reason for the narrative and half truths is to hide doping. But if it isn't, then what is the purpose of the myths, contradictions, and arrogance?

We aren't talking about myths, half-truths and contradictions. We are talking about the enormous output of media from the Team Sky bandwagon. Sure, there are some contradictions and some of it is probably a cover for things that can only be explained by doping. But not all of it is. Most of it is just the same as any other hype from any other organisation that wants to present itself as better than the rest.

For example, I don't see the marginal gains thing as a cover for doping, I see it as saying " We pay attention to the tiny details that others don't". Its advertising. To understand that, put yourself in the shoes of a member of the likely target audience...a potential subscriber to Sky TV. That potential customer won't think "oh, its ok, I will subscribe to Sky tv now that I know that Team Sky are winning through marginal gains and not dope", that isn't the point of the message. The point of the message is to drip feed into the notion that Team Sky are more professional and capable, and by association so are Sky Digital.

Its advertising. PR. Call it want you want, but it isn't about counteracting accusations of doping.

Why be surprised and upset that a media organisation pumps out advertising? I'm baffled.

 

[The Hitch]

marginal gains are absolutely about counteracting accusations of doping.

Cycling has long been associated with doping in England. For the success to be truly profitable, sky felt they needed to reassure everyone that they are doing it clean. exactly like their hero Lance did 10 years ago when he was trying to sell his own brand and made sure to include all those marginal gains in his books and documentaries.

 

[wendybnt]

Re:

marginal gains are absolutely about counteracting accusations of doping.

Cycling has long been associated with doping in England. For the success to be truly profitable, sky felt they needed to reassure everyone that they are doing it clean. exactly like their hero Lance did 10 years ago when he was trying to sell his own brand and made sure to include all those marginal gains in his books and documentaries.

The idea of marginal gains pre-dates Team Sky. It goes back to before the 2008 Olympics. Accusations of doping were not really an issue for Team GB track team. There was no credibility gap.

Your second paragraph is about the road team, and I don't disagree with you. They did need to reassure the public, and maybe the board of directors at Sky (although they don't seem to care about corruption). With regards to Armstrong, his marginal gain was that he said he trained harder. Yes, he had a whole industry built up around him, but that wasn't to do with doping, that was to do with successful marketing. Fellow Tour-winning dopers like Ulrich, and Pantani were just crap at it. Nor did they come from countries of 250 million people all looking for a national hero to emulate by wearing Nike, riding Trek and wearing Oakleys.

The Sky PR output is not exclusively about counteracting accusations of doping. It is about making money and selling stuff.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: Re:

Why be surprised and upset that a media organisation pumps out advertising? I'm baffled.

Let's go back to the first question in the previous post. (I'm not making a comparison to Sky, yet.) Are we allowed to be upset at a cigarette company advertising to children? Are we allowed to be upset at pop-up ads that prevent us from viewing content? Are we allowed to be upset at the density of commercials on TV or radio? Are we Allowed to be upset at the aesthetics of those commercials, like those ones that shout or feature inappropriate (in someone's mind) images?

Yes.

A little closer to Sky now. Are we allowed to be upset at companies that tell their side of the story and not the other? Are we allowed to be upset at companies that imply their way of doing things is the only way? Are we allowed to be upset at a company that disparages their competition?

Yes. Because those messages sway their audience into believing things that aren't 100% true. And those misconceptions then affect the state of that market. Look at how many things have to label themselves Gluten-Free. Have you seen fruit labeled gluten-free? That wasn't an idea out of the blue, that was a reaction to the public frenzy over gluten, caused by advertising interested in demonizing gluten as part out their marketing campaign. That fruit company, drink company, or whatever company that common sense knows cannot have gluten shouldn't have to say so, but were forced into a corner by underhanded advertising and marketing. Any example of advertising a diet at the expense of other legitimate foods or practices is equally dangerous to the image of health and wellness.

As fans, we are seeing the rest of the fan base being manipulated in the same way. It's equally dangerous to the image of the sport. That instead of focusing on actual gains, fitness magazines are now writing about marginal gains, because the market thinks that that is what is more important. It's less about the attention to the team (which would be more acceptable), and about the fans'/sports attention to what Sky's smoke and mirrors of what they say is important.

And the doping. People are accepting the half-truths as explanations for clean athletes surpassing doped performances and riders. They're not questioning the narrative, and their not questioning the performances. The ignorance of doping is upsetting, and Sky's persistent mission to maintain that status quo is also frustrating.

 

[del1962]

If it wasn't for advertising pro road cycling wouldn't exist, no sponsors no money in it

 

[wendybnt]

Strides, we are just going to have to accept that we are coming at this from different angles.

I think its marketing to sell stuff. You think it is PR to counteract doping accusations. (despite the marginal gains pr and all the other crap pre-dating any actual success, and pre-dating any accusations).

You are viewing everything through the distorting lens of doping. I'm looking at it from the perspective of a business woman, and to me it makes total sense from a marketing point of view. It is all about marketing, making money. It is professional sport not amateur. And Sky are very, very good at it. So they should be too. They have the expertise of a multi-billion dollar media empire behind them.