Forgive me if this has been brought up already, but it would seem to fit this thread.
First there was this insight (from a different thread):
jimbob_in_co said:
I started dealing with twitter in October 2007, about the time Social Media companies were starting to reach out to his Foundation, trying to get them interested in using this new form of communication.
And then we have the revealing of the latest hideous jersey
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/radioshack-unveils-new-kit-for-2011
With the latests sponsor: TWITTER! Yeah everybody!
Once again this would point to the insulting transparency of all this. LA embraced twitter as a way to circumnavigate the ("lame stream") media because, ya' know, they just didn't "get it." This really kicked into high gear around his 2.0 ride of the Giro.
He resorted to Twitter for "the fans", his "followers." Other riders soon followed the irresistable trend. It was all so much fun!
But now we see that LA was nothing but a professional "tweeter" the whole time. Everything he does is self-serving veiled behind the guise of, "just being true to himself." (my quote)
At some point early on, some agreement was made between he and the head Tweets as to how this would all unfold. "Oh look, LA's got over 2.7 million followers now. We would just
love to support him, and his team, and
awareness"
"Since the inception of Team RadioShack, we've relied heavily on Twitter to help keep our fans around the world updated and engaged, so we're excited to embrace them on our 2011 kit," said Lee Applbaum executive vice president and chief marketing officer for RadioShack.
But wait! What about Livestrong.com/.org/.gag? No followers there? Just not getting the message out well enough?
No corporate-speak going on there at all. Nope.
That stupid twitter logo still doesn't make the jersey any less fugly.
(Do I hate? Why, yes! Thanks for asking.)