Lionel Birnie tells it like it is.

aurelio_-_banned

It's good to see that there is still room for some genuine critical thinking out there, even from within the portals of a manstream media source such as Cycling Weekly. Well done Lionel Birnie! I wonder if the editor will take notice of his call to 'let's keep it all in perspective and afford him [Armstrong] the recognition befitting a man who has finished 64th, 120th and 45th in his three days of racing so far...' ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 75526.html

dave_1

aurelio wrote:

It's good to see that there is still room for some genuine critical thinking out there, even from within the portals of a manstream media source such as Cycling Weekly. Well done Lionel Birnie! I wonder if the editor will take notice of his call to 'let's keep it all in perspective and afford him [Armstrong] the recognition befitting a man who has finished 64th, 120th and 45th in his three days of racing so far...' ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 75526.html

already been posted..stop repeat posting and find something new

aurelio_-_banned

Dave_1 wrote:

aurelio wrote:

It's good to see that there is still room for some genuine critical thinking out there, even from within the portals of a manstream media source such as Cycling Weekly. Well done Lionel Birnie! I wonder if the editor will take notice of his call to 'let's keep it all in perspective and afford him [Armstrong] the recognition befitting a man who has finished 64th, 120th and 45th in his three days of racing so far...' ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 75526.html

already been posted..stop repeat posting and find something new

Where? Without actively searching for one I don't see a link to this story elsewhere in the 'Race' forum.

I wonder, will you be making a habit of spitting out your dummy in a similar fashion everytime someone posts a link to a story that has already been mentioned elsewhere, or do you only do this when the link is to an article that is critical about 'his holiness'. :roll:

dave_1

aurelio wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

aurelio wrote:

It's good to see that there is still room for some genuine critical thinking out there, even from within the portals of a manstream media source such as Cycling Weekly. Well done Lionel Birnie! I wonder if the editor will take notice of his call to 'let's keep it all in perspective and afford him [Armstrong] the recognition befitting a man who has finished 64th, 120th and 45th in his three days of racing so far...' ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 75526.html

already been posted..stop repeat posting and find something new

Where? Without actively searching for one I don't see a link to this story elsewhere in the 'Race' forum.

I wonder, will you be making a habit of spitting out your dummy in a similar fashion everytime someone posts a link to a story that has already been mentioned elsewhere, or do you only do this when the link is to an article that is critical about 'his holiness'. :roll:[/quote

we should have all your LA links in a sticky you've cluttered this place up with repeat postings that often...greg and stef on the phone etc...

scottfrasernz

Isn't it amusing how these dogmatic Armstrong detractors unwittingly give him even more exposure..

In a word: naive.

colint

wow, Aurelio doing a bit of copy and paste, thats unusual. ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz

cannonfodder

There's really no insight in the article either - nothing that hasn't been covered elsewhere.

Hey Aurelio's anti-lance avatar has gone - is he mellowing?

moray_gub

aurelio wrote:

It's good to see that there is still room for some genuine critical thinking out there, even from within the portals of a manstream media source such as Cycling Weekly. Well done Lionel Birnie! I wonder if the editor will take notice of his call to 'let's keep it all in perspective and afford him [Armstrong] the recognition befitting a man who has finished 64th, 120th and 45th in his three days of racing so far...' ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 75526.html

So the next time the favourite or a big name rider in the Tour De France starts of a stage race with three finishes in the pack it would be right to ignore him ?

MG

blazing_saddles

Moray Gub wrote:

So the next time the favourite or a big name rider in the Tour De France starts of a stage race with three finishes in the pack it would be right to ignore him ?

MG

Seems to work that way, over in the Tour de San Luis thread.

Anyhow, for what it's worth. An interesting little GC cluster at 29" off the pace.
36 Oscar Pereiro Sio (Spa) Caisse d'Epargne
37 Jens Voigt (Ger) Team Saxo Bank
38 Jesus Hernandez (Spa) Astana
39 Lance Armstrong (USA) Astana

......unlike Basso, who is 6th in his GC......but at 2 and a half minutes.
What a difference a climb or 10 makes.........

Kléber

scottfrasernz wrote:

Isn't it amusing how these dogmatic Armstrong detractors unwittingly give him even more exposure..

For me it's not amusing to see Cycling Weekly writing like this, it makes a big change in attitude, no? It's one thing to debate doping on forums, it's another thing when the media start talking like this.

thomasmc

Aurelio, I'm with you on a lot of your comments on LA. But man, you have got to start posting / commenting on something else! You are diluting your argument by coming across as bitter.

steve2021

Kléber wrote:

scottfrasernz wrote:

Isn't it amusing how these dogmatic Armstrong detractors unwittingly give him even more exposure..

For me it's not amusing to see Cycling Weekly writing like this, it makes a big change in attitude, no? It's one thing to debate doping on forums, it's another thing when the media start talking like this.

I agree. It's a big improvement.

6288

the whole article smacks of sensationalism and has very little do with cycling ... the very things they accuse LA of ...

leguape

Kléber wrote:

scottfrasernz wrote:

Isn't it amusing how these dogmatic Armstrong detractors unwittingly give him even more exposure..

For me it's not amusing to see Cycling Weekly writing like this, it makes a big change in attitude, no? It's one thing to debate doping on forums, it's another thing when the media start talking like this.

I thought Cycling Weekly had been pretty consist in their scepticism from the beginning of the comeback - questioning the perceived transparency and so on pretty much from the outset.

I find it bizarre when people talk about "the media" not being sceptical or pandering to Armstrong. In the british mainstream press it's probably quicker to name the cycling writers who could be described as in his camp than those who aren't.

dave_1

Dave_1 wrote:

aurelio wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

aurelio wrote:

It's good to see that there is still room for some genuine critical thinking out there, even from within the portals of a manstream media source such as Cycling Weekly. Well done Lionel Birnie! I wonder if the editor will take notice of his call to 'let's keep it all in perspective and afford him [Armstrong] the recognition befitting a man who has finished 64th, 120th and 45th in his three days of racing so far...' ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 75526.html

already been posted..stop repeat posting and find something new

Where? Without actively searching for one I don't see a link to this story elsewhere in the 'Race' forum.

I wonder, will you be making a habit of spitting out your dummy in a similar fashion everytime someone posts a link to a story that has already been mentioned elsewhere, or do you only do this when the link is to an article that is critical about 'his holiness'. :roll:[/quote

we should have all your LA links in a sticky you've cluttered this place up with repeat postings that often...greg and stef on the phone etc...

stop spamming threads pls, pushing repeat threads to top of list!

show your fellow cyclists on here a little respect by not cluttering up the forum with your single issue posting...I also want to talk about things other than LA-you are right, i also believe he doped. What are we arguing about?

richard wants a baum

to be fair dave iain posted the the link in the TdU thread and it might not have been picked up by Aurelio, and i dont see the harm discussing the article in a seperate thread as it keeps the TdU thread about the TdU. Besides the reply to your original response to the thread he hasnt posted agagin maybe you should be addressing that to

scottfrasernz
colint
cannonfodder
Moray Gub
Blazing Saddles
Kléber
thomasmc
steve2021
6288
leguape
and yourself (and me )

The fact is that the Media have been very kind so far to Mr Armstrong so far but i think by the time his seriously racing in Europe that will change.

aurelio_-_banned

richard wants a baum wrote:

The fact is that the Media have been very kind so far to Mr Armstrong so far but i think by the time his seriously racing in Europe that will change.

I'm not so sure. Just look at the way L'Equipe has been instructed by its owner (and the owner of ASO) Marie-Odile Amaury, not to run any doping stories in the future (especially 'speculative' ones) other than those relating to confirmed positives from bodies such as the UCI.

It appears that this new policy is the direct result of interventions by both the dopers friend and long-time supporter of Armstrong, Pat McQuaid, and Armstrong himself.

Personally, I thought the way the UCI and Armstrong have gone so far to try to re-impose the traditional doping 'omerta', even on the supposedly independent media, was a HUGE story and well worthy of comment. However, I can guess that any thread I might have started on this issue would have been rapidly attacked as a sign of 'an anti-Armstrong obsession' by all the Lance fan-boys. :roll:

http://www.lesdessousdusport.fr/l-equip ... opage-2829

http://www.hbvl.be/nieuws/media_cultuur ... a982222%7D

colint

only ever posting on a single subject is the sign of your obsession, not the content of your post.

aurelio_-_banned

colint wrote:

only ever posting on a single subject is the sign of your obsession, not the content of your post.

So if I were to post more on other topics, such whether Campagnolo is really better than Shimano, this would somehow prove I was not suffering from an 'obsession'? To my mind, my admitted focus on doping/Armstrong is more a reflection of the limited amount of time I am prepared to spend on a forum such as this. Plus, of course, the 'topic in hand' is always guaranteed to be 'good value for money'.

colint

Nothing personal here, but your points of view definitely lose a lot of credibility when you only ever post on one subject, ands generally post the same sort of stuff. There are plenty of armstrong non believers who manage to put their point across better and have more credibility as they are viewed are more balanced and knowledgeable.

With the greatest of respect, you just come across as a bore who knows how to copy and paste on one subject

Kléber

Are people not shooting the messenger! Aurelio is getting flack for having a consistent attitude and the energy to hold on to it but I suspect it's the message some people don't enjoy and he/she is just reminding people of this.

aurelio_-_banned

colint wrote:

With the greatest of respect, you just come across as a bore who knows how to copy and paste on one subject

You must really have a problem when reading newspapers. I can just imagine you saying to yourself. "Well, I think this report on the Palestinian /Israeli situation totally lacks credibility, and the writer is a clearly a bore. After all it's written by the papers specialist on the Palestinian/ Israeli situation and that's all he ever writes about!"

To my mind all that really matters is the quality of my arguments and the credibility of any resources I might link to. To dismiss what someone says because they don't also spend time discussing the best bib shorts or whatever is simply irrational.

DaveyL

Kléber wrote:

Are people not shooting the messenger! Aurelio is getting flack for having a consistent attitude and the energy to hold on to it but I suspect it's the message some people don't enjoy and he/she is just reminding people of this.

I disagree, the point is that on this forum anyway, the battle lines have been drawn long ago.

Hands up anyone who's changed their mind about Armstrong after reading aurelio's arguments. Those who believe will continue to do so no matter how many posts the guy makes, and those who don't believe have heard it all before, many times.

colint

Oh, so your the specialist on the subject now ! My apologies, I must have missed the official announcement (or maybe that was it).

To take your annology, if the writer posted the same line of thought in every article, not balanced, not looking at both sides, I'd stop reading it because it would be pointless. I know what the article is going to say, etc etc

You clearly post on the subject as you'd like to change peoples point of view, which is fair enough. If you think you're doing it in the most productive way then knock yourself out.

aurelio_-_banned

DaveyL wrote:

Hands up anyone who's changed their mind about Armstrong after reading aurelio's arguments. Those who believe will continue to do so no matter how many posts the guy makes, and those who don't believe have heard it all before, many times.

And the nonsense and PR spin regurgitated by the Lance fan boys has been posted many, many times, but that doesn't stop people from reposting it ad infinitum. :roll:

I feel that Frank Zappa was probably right when he wrote: 'The only people you can ever get to agree with you are those who already agree with you.'

That said, it is always an entertaining game, highlighting the irrationality underpinning the faith of Armstrong's 'true believers', and why would anyone post on here if they didn't they find it to be a diverting way to pass a little time.

Kléber

I think some people have changed their minds. Plenty of people seem to come here and in time admit to doubts about Armstrong's stance on doping. They go from the "he's never tested positive, you know" stance to the "well maybe it is possible" and more.

Hundreds of years ago everyone knew the sun revolved around the earth, I'm sure many got bored of pests like Copernicus banging on about wacky, heretic ideas like how the earth revolves sun.

blazing_saddles

I think Richard has a point, in so much that having Armstrong Down Under has diluted the actual race reporting.
Sure, there is a lot more text containing the words TDU, but the race is playing second fiddle to this comeback, with the overall result that it actually appears a less important fixture, than recent editions. An odd phenomeneon, not to be encouraged.

People know which side of the fence, I stand, but I was not impressed by the blog quality of the piece.
Too much rant, not enough facts.

However, I did find this "fact" a bit telltale:-
[Updated: Armstrong did not confirm rumours that he's receiving $1m (Australian) for appearing at the Tour Down Under, but did say that any fee he receives will not be donated to the Lance Armstrong Foundation. He added that the fee he was receiving was not a 'race fee' but was in line with what he has been paid for public speaking engagements in recent years.]

IMO: He should be drawing a salary from Astana and donating appearance fees straight to the foundation.
The reason should be obvious.

Birillo

We all know that Aurelio has an agenda, but that's not the point. If Lionel Birnie really has "come out" with questions like that, then there is some hope for journalism from the British cycling press.

hotoph88

Editorial policy at Cycling Weekly has lost its way big style. Set against a massive increase in interest in the sport of cycling in the UK in recent years, its circulation has seen long term decline change to stabilisation at the bottom of the slope. There was scope for it to have doubled or tripled based on the coverage the sport gets in the general media. Pro- Cycling and Cycling Plus have pushed past CW’s sister monthly journal. The relaxing highlight of my week used to be receiving CW on Thursday and reading it cover to cover, several times. Not changing a habit of a lifetime, I still receive it through the post, every week. Often it waits until Friday or Saturday to be opened and it is like having a phone call with a long term friend who’s character has been wrecked by a messy marriage and divorce and the ravages of alcohol abuse. You do it because you hope the person you knew 20 years ago will re-appear, and out of duty, but not out of any pleasure. I have generally finished reading it within less than 10 minutes and nearly always, I feel worse afterwards. In the last 15 or so years, I have had the space to keep them, all nicely bound. At Christmas I was in the loft looking at a few old ones. They were great, but how I wish I had the ones from the 1960’s and 70’s which I threw away. A few of the covers of recent weeks makes my case:
“They lost 20 ½ KG in 8 weeks” “Cavendish trains in Majorca” “Watch the Tour in 09 this could be you” “night riding masterclass” Never too late to start training” “How you can stay motivated” Just how stupid do they think I am ?

Then, “Pendleton nude and all the other top-rated stories”. This from the idiots of a magazine editorial team who cannot put Nicole Cooke properly on a cover on her own when she wins, the World Road Champs. Apparently the number 1 and number 3 stories of the year were our two female track stars being conned into turning themselves into “soft porn gets on a bike”.

There has never been more to write about in cycling for a UK audience. Instead the editorial team seem bereft of any ideas other than putting Hoy or Lance on the cover with some fatuous story behind it. Don’t tell me it is because it sells magazines because the facts of circulation in the Lance years, when they could not have put him on the cover more, are that it does not. The general interest in cycling does, spurred on by a, frankly, over enthusiastic slice of coverage of the GB track team, by the general media.

Still, the decline is long term, I don’t expect any quick fix now. My Christmas viewing revealed that in Dec 1999 apparently, according to CW, the GB rider of the last century was Chris Boardman. I admire Chris and think he did wonders with his talent. But Robert Millar, Tom Simpson or Beryl Burton not No 1 ? No wonder theses fools could not work out how much more Nicole Cooke has done.

As to Lance - human nature dictates that with one hell of a lot of personal investment in following a story, deciding the emperor has no clothes on, is a very big ask. I was entranced watching Barjne Riis in 1996 - I used to think he was one heck of a great guy.

leguape

hotoph88 wrote:

Then, “Pendleton nude and all the other top-rated stories”. This from the idiots of a magazine editorial team who cannot put Nicole Cooke properly on a cover on her own when she wins, the World Road Champs. Apparently the number 1 and number 3 stories of the year were our two female track stars being conned into turning themselves into “soft porn gets on a bike”.

It's not their fault that the internet is controlled by users. This is the google trends for pendleton v cooke in 2008: http://is.gd/h3NC

Here's a thought: those were the top rated stories because that's what people searched for. I can tell you for a fact that when I look at the google analytics for my own site "victoria pendleton naked" is the most popular search that brings traffic to my site by a fact of about 2000%. I don't expect that trend to be much different elsewhere when it comes to search. And search/SEO is key to any business that actually intends to make money.

Here's a google trend for 2008 for hoy, cooke, armstrong, pendleton: http://is.gd/h3Ov

Now I'd hazard a guess that most journalists need to make a living. I know what I'd be putting on the cover based on that, and it's the one that keeps the advertisers and audience.

And by the way "soft porn on a bike"? Did you say that when it was Annie Liebowitz taking one of the iconic cycling portraits of any era and the subject was Lance Armstrong? Somehow I doubt it. And that's why this sport has a problem attracting women.

hotoph88

leguape - that is the identical false argument that has got the banking system to exactly where it is now "...we have not got a clue what it is we are trading in but everyone else is doing it. It is so very popular... so we better join in, quick, let's place our bids and buy those bonds". You logic is diconnected. Do people who google for "Victoria Pendleton naked" pay yearly subscritions to Cycling Weekly after they have had a vicarious thrill from seeing her on their computer screen ? Even if those sort of people buy a single copy in the deluded hope it is stuffed full of naked female cyclists, they will be so disappointed that it will be the only copy they purchase.

My point is that Victoria Pendleton naked is not why I buy CW. And even if it were the most googled search on Earth, the editorial staff did not need to add to it by giving this "fact" a whole page in the magazine. It is not a story I want to know. If I wanted a "top shelf" story, I would go there, but I don't. I like cycling, and cycle sport and I want winners that win fair. I don't want soft porn creeping into the single weekly magazine I can buy and I don't want the editorial team to just keep giving me the same story each week - Lance speaks. Perhaps the gulf between what I want and what is popular, is why I am sorry to say I have no idea who Annie Liebowitz is and no idea what her picture of Lance is. And no, please, I do not need a link to find it. I know I could if I wanted to, but I just don't care. I like cycling.

I can understand CW being very reticent to publish anything negative on Lance. I don't think there is a sporstman on the planet, or history, who has exerted such pressure on the press around the World and the UK libel laws so empower individuals in his position, it is incredible. (What were our politicians doing?)