The Article: WSJ - reopened!

[Anonymous]

Well thats good news.

CAn i just point out though merging this thread with the old one was a bit silly. |This is finally the story and readers of the thread will have a bloody hard time finding the start of the proper discussion, the photo of the article etc.

 

[Animal]

I just love this. He's not excited about a little thing called the tour de france that starts tomorrow. What he's really excited about is an article that will distract from the prologue and the tour that brings up all the dirty laundary from years ago.

After years of letdowns by a bunch of druggies, who made us all look like t-wats for cheering them on, what else do you EXPECT?

I've cheered for them all in my time.

Never again.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

When he ended his 4+ year boycott of the French press, he gave an exclusive interview to drooling fanboy Jean René Godard of France Télévisions. Jean René even asked him a "tough" question that was a set up - what a joke of an interview that was.

WSJ has the advantage of not needing cycling related advertising or Lance interviews to sell their papers.

Yesterday RS announced they would not be holding a pre-Tour press conference. But Lance gave a 45 minute interview to a select group of 'journos' that ran through Reuters & Associated Press.

In Italy during last years Giro the media gave Lance the nickname 'Osama' - as the only interviews they were getting were poor quality video pieces.

 

[Barrus]

Well thats good news.

CAn i just point out though merging this thread with the old one was a bit silly. |This is finally the story and readers of the thread will have a bloody hard time finding the start of the proper discussion, the photo of the article etc.

Can we perhaps make a new thread with in the first post a link to the articvle, and until that pops up, keep this one open for random talk, like what has happened up to this point in the thread

 

[CycloErgoSum]

So our non-trolling launches into attack on fanboys and warns off those who don't necessarily like Armstrong but are grown up enough to understand the doping culture that existed in cycling.

You are a self confessed fanboy of Landis these days - he's the only cyclist you like and you cheered him on at the "top of your lungs" the other day - so it's no surprise that you dimiss the fact he did this for the money. It may not fit your hollywood image of him but, that's just a rational statement.

BPC, the 'everyone else was doing it' ruse doesn't work when it comes to Texas.

See this article: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=howard/100528

Like your use of the past tense.

 

[oldschoolnik]

Yeah well it's not surprising he doesn't want to give a press conference and have to deal with this crap. He has little tour to focus on.

Of course, it goes without saying that none of you guys wanted this tour settled on the road.

Yes, I'd like it settled "on the road" not in a Gynecological office or the in Dr Ferraris camper in Tennerife like you would.

 

[CycloErgoSum]

I think I can hear someone speaking...nah it's just the wind

 

[Anonymous]

Don't quote him. Just report his post.

He has taken to PMing me his responses that are being deleted so that he makes sure I read them. I really get under his skin. It must frustrate him that I best him at ever turn. Thats good because that is the opposite of what a troll like him is looking for.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

I have often said, feel free to PM or mail me when there is a problem.

Susan

 

[Race Radio]

Armstrong just filed an injuction to stop publication. I wonder what he is scared of?

 

[Cobblestones]

And it's troll-free again. Thanks Susan.

 

[Barrus]

Armstrong just filed an injuction to stop publication. I wonder what he is scared of?

where did you get that?
Wonder what the injunction is based on, the records for the court case would be public, if we only get to know the case number, or we wouldn't even need that if you used the right search terms at the right search form

 

[Anonymous]

Armstrong just filed an injuction to stop publication. I wonder what he is scared of?

seriously..? where has this information come from?

Dont see how he can without knowing the content, and its an interview with landis, not an article on him. Doesnt america have freedom of the press?

Im assuming this article has already been "leaked" and will appear on the internet even if the injuntion is succesful.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Armstrong just filed an injuction to stop publication. I wonder what he is scared of?

Just thinking out loud here - can LA inc try for an injuction when the 'news' if tomorrows headline only broke today? Or was an injuction served earlier - and this piece is a 'watered down' version of what they may have been sitting on for the last week(s)?

 

[Anonymous]

Just thinking out loud here - can LA inc try for an injuction when the 'news' if tomorrows headline only broke today? Or was an injuction served earlier - and this piece is a 'watered down' version of what they may have been sitting on for the last week(s)?

I think you can be sure his lawyers have been sitting waiting with the paperwork ready.

 

[CycloErgoSum]

Armstrong just filed an injuction to stop publication. I wonder what he is scared of?

Texarse love Censorship (someone has to)

 

[Cobblestones]

Armstrong just filed an injuction to stop publication. I wonder what he is scared of?

He's a busy man. Between banning people from twitter, dodging journalists, the daily survey of the press and meeting with his lawyers to formulate injunctions, he also has a little race coming up.

 

[BroDeal]

I think you can be sure his lawyers have been sitting waiting with the paperwork ready.

This is not the U.K. Trying to prevent a major publication from printing something is a very tall order. Libel laws are completely different here, and they are stacked against public figures, which Armstrong most definitely is.

 

[Anonymous]

I dont know enough about the freedom of the press to comment really, but how does it affect the internet etc. You might be able to prevent physical publication in a country, but can you prevent digital publication? I cant see how they can prevent it, the WSJ would have anticipated this. And as said before, if he did manage to stop them im sure the article has already been leaked.

 

[Barrus]

Just thinking out loud here - can LA inc try for an injuction when the 'news' if tomorrows headline only broke today? Or was an injuction served earlier - and this piece is a 'watered down' version of what they may have been sitting on for the last week(s)?

Also, wouldn't an injunction be a PR nightmare. Really that most often is taken in a manner as, what was said must be true by the general population. Especially with a high-standing paper such as the wall street journal, you cannot just pass the article of as rubbish, the people won't be as willing to believe that. Also it ensures that the article is known about by a much larger audience, the more information there is about an article the more likely it is that people will read it, especially with an injunction that will be written about by other papers and magazines.

But really is LA trying to get an injunction against publication?

@ TSF, you can prevent digital publication through legitimate servers and publishers, however most times that happens, the article moves to a foreign server, or is spread through less legitimate means, such as leaking. But it can ensure that a large publisher does not run it on their website, which could lessen the possible audiences.

 

[alberto.legstrong]

Wow, more useless speculation in The Clinic.



The Australian always runs a few pages of the WSJ but I'm not sure it would have this.

I'm sure you can find it, maybe a day or so later.

this is beyond hilarious.

Is.... the ...... article....... published ......... ????

DIDN'T THINK SO ! The wsj is the gift that keeps on giving. They have driven traffic to their site by NOT publishing an article. GENIUS!!!! That really is Gold, Jerry, GOLD!

 

[python]

Just thinking out loud here - can LA inc try for an injuction when the 'news' if tomorrows headline only broke today? Or was an injuction served earlier - and this piece is a 'watered down' version of what they may have been sitting on for the last week(s)?

the only basis for the la injunction could be the release of confidential information from the ongoing investigation.

i doubt he'll succeed whatever the content of the tomorrow's article.

i'm speculating here, but the wsj took their time and the editors in all probability have run the article by their corporate lawyers.

also, iirc from lance to landis book there was never an attempt to stop that book because there was no basis in the us law.

 

[Anonymous]

the only basis for the la injunction could be the release of confidential information from the ongoing investigation.

the articles about doping. The investigation is about fraud.

Im sure Novitsky has had a chance to read the article

 

[Cobblestones]

the articles about doping. The investigation is about fraud.

Im sure Novitsky has had a chance to read the article

Also (from a quick search on Wikipedia):

n the United States, a court can order parties to a case not to comment on it but has no authority to stop unrelated reporters from reporting on a case. Most statutes which restrict what may be reported have generally been found unconstitutional and void.

So, since there's no case Landis vs. Armstrong as I know of, it should be fair game to print a Landis interview. If it's just independent reporting, an injunction is even less likely to succeed.

 

[180mmCrank]

Well thats good news.

CAn i just point out though merging this thread with the old one was a bit silly. |This is finally the story and readers of the thread will have a bloody hard time finding the start of the proper discussion, the photo of the article etc.

I merged the threads. To be honest as has been pointed out there isn't actaully any article yet - this really is just more specualtion about what may or may not be in the article. Which is fine but doesn't seem to require another thread.

Happy to open a new thread if/when an article appears.

And thanks for the feeback.

Terry