I've mostly stayed away from the Lance Armstrong story because I felt like there was little good that would come out of it. I'm not a cycling fan, so I didn't have a strong opinion about Lance or doping in the sport, and as a baseball fan, I feel somewhat desensitized to finger-pointing arguments about performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). Because of everything Armstrong came to represent with regard to his foundation and experience with cancer, I think I largely chose to focus on what had been accomplished outside of cycling. With the most recent reports of his doping and the loss of his Tour de France titles, I saw it as more of the same back-and-forth between Lance and his past competitors still bitter about his winnings (whether doped or not).
This article from David Carr changed my perspective on the issue in two ways. First, I learned that the people who have been working to expose Lance's doping are not angry former competitors. Instead, for the most part they are individuals with few resources and no real financial interest in the case. A few small voices who refused to tolerate cheating kept repeating their message and working to expose the truth. If anything, it was Armstrong's camp that used heavy-handed tactics to try to manipulate the way that the case was covered in the media. Second, I learned that, at least based on the information from the most recent reports Armstrong was involved in more than just individual doping. He cheated systematically, conspired to keep it hidden, and also encouraged others to cheat with him. It is easy to argue that a PED user harms only him/herself, but it seems that this was not the case with Armstrong.
Even if you are sick of hearing of this whole case, I encourage you to read Carr's piece on the bloggers and non-traditional journalists who would not stand by while the traditional media ignored the evidence.
"Chasing Armstrong With Truth" by David Carr
Published in the New York Times, 10/28/12
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/29/business/media/chasing-lance-armstrongs-misdeeds-from-the-sidelines.html?pagewanted=2&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0&pagewanted=all
Eric
Where else do you think this is a big problem for journalism today?
ReplyDeleteIt's a tough balance between highly trained and experienced reporters with ties to newspapers/companies/athletes versus bloggers who report on similar issues but are not tied to these same benefactors.
I think that this is a problem in all types of journalism. Think back to the article I posted a couple of months ago about quotation approval -- http://dailylongread.blogspot.com/2012/09/longread-160-quotation-approval-92612.html.
ReplyDeleteTruly balanced reporting is hard enough, but many journalists faced diminished access and/or ridicule if they swim against the stream. At one level, the explosion of online information sources threaten to dilute the quality of journalism. At another level, though, they can often be free of some of the red tape that constrains some professional journalists.
Eric