Tomorrow's Wall Street Journal

12467

Comments

  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    andylav wrote:
    Can't see it being anything earth shattering on the basis of that headline / leader - possibly only an interview with Landis / first hand rehash of the content of his original emails.

    Armstrong filed an injunction in the last hour to prevent publication.

    Make of that what you will.

    You have to admire Rupert's sense of timing and wanting to sell more copy.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    iainf72 wrote:
    andylav wrote:
    Can't see it being anything earth shattering on the basis of that headline / leader - possibly only an interview with Landis / first hand rehash of the content of his original emails.

    Armstrong filed an injunction in the last hour to prevent publication.

    Make of that what you will.

    I make of it, that he's got his eye firmly fixed on the ball..........
    .........instead of the bike. :wink:

    Unsurprisingly, CN's "Clinic" has gone into meltdown, with speculation and a new troll invasion.

    US posters suggest that his injunction is a non-starter, as it's an interview with Landis and given their freedom of the press laws.

    Anyhow, the leader is interesting, as it "hints" at corroboration.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    andylav wrote:
    Can't see it being anything earth shattering on the basis of that headline / leader - possibly only an interview with Landis / first hand rehash of the content of his original emails.

    Armstrong filed an injunction in the last hour to prevent publication.

    Make of that what you will.

    I can see the idea behind the "last hour" injunction. That way Murdoch has to wait a day or so to print and by that time the TDF is off and running and his idea of selling more print
    on that particular day is over. And it's probably old news anyway. He was just doing it to sell media anyway. Which is what he does. Does that make sense?
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    Interesting to see if this has any impact on relations between Shack and Murdoch's team :wink:
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    False alarm on the injunction, apparently. So, expect it to hit the newstands and pay and display, online.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/201 ... trongs.php
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    if the article adds new info then yes, publish, but if it doesn't, it isn't fair on the race to bring the spotlight back on it. Novitsky should work privately till he has his all the USPS ducks lined up
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/07/wsj_to_spoil_lance_armstrongs.php

    Have to wonder how much of this is about journalistic integrity and how is simply about
    selling paper? I'm thinking all the media is going for strictly entertainment value as opposed to actual news. Must be the NEW journalistic integrity? And the high and mighty Wall Street Journal no less. What's that about, except for Rupert?
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    dennisn wrote:

    Have to wonder how much of this is about journalistic integrity and how is simply about
    selling paper? I'm thinking all the media is going for strictly entertainment value as opposed to actual news. Must be the NEW journalistic integrity? And the high and mighty Wall Street Journal no less. What's that about, except for Rupert?

    I've missed your point here. Newspaper gets big story, publishes big story, hopes to sell lots of papers in the process.

    Where is the lack of integrity you speak of?
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    dennisn wrote:
    iainf72 wrote:
    http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/07/wsj_to_spoil_lance_armstrongs.php

    Have to wonder how much of this is about journalistic integrity and how is simply about
    selling paper? I'm thinking all the media is going for strictly entertainment value as opposed to actual news. Must be the NEW journalistic integrity? And the high and mighty Wall Street Journal no less. What's that about, except for Rupert?

    ALL journalism is about selling papers. But for some, such as WSJ, journalist integrity and big serious stories is their selling point. For others, like the NY Post, it's entertainment and tittle tattle.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    and Lemond hs just predicted LA will either not start the TDF or pull out before the race arrives in France..interesting...perhaps he knows stuff we don't
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    dennisn wrote:

    Have to wonder how much of this is about journalistic integrity and how is simply about
    selling paper? I'm thinking all the media is going for strictly entertainment value as opposed to actual news. Must be the NEW journalistic integrity? And the high and mighty Wall Street Journal no less. What's that about, except for Rupert?

    I've missed your point here. Newspaper gets big story, publishes big story, hopes to sell lots of papers in the process.

    Where is the lack of integrity you speak of?

    So much is made of journalistic integrity by everyone in the media that I'm not sure who they are trying to convince, themselves or me. I tend to think that newspapers and the like are not as interested in the TRUTH as they would have you believe. They are interested in money, and, sad to say, money and the truth don't often go well together.
    i.e. truth and integrity goes down the tubes in favor of pure entertainment. Much like many a Hollywood biography. More people seem to only want the dirt(and are willing to pay for it) than want those interested in the real story(whatever that may be). As an example take any bike magazine and their equipment reviews. They don't dare say much of anything bad about whatever it is they are reviewing. How can they? There's a 2 page ad for the product on the next page. Integrity?? And yes, I know that isn't quite the case in this situation but I don't think for a minute that journalist's are very partial to truth.
    I believe they are out to sell copy first and truth and integrity are down the list a ways.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    Kimmage wades in:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... ansparency
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    He's right though isn't he? The longer it takes the UCI to produce documentary evidence of the Armstrong donation and what it was spent on the more suspicious it looks.

    At the very best it's a PR disaster.
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    Dave_1 wrote:
    and Lemond hs just predicted LA will either not start the TDF or pull out before the race arrives in France..interesting...perhaps he knows stuff we don't


    Perhaps we will witness one of Armstrong's convenient 'crashes' in the first few stages!
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Kimmage wades in:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... ansparency

    I tend to disagree with him about NOT sweeping things under the carpet. Happens all the time, in all walks of life and it's no big deal. It's only a big deal for him because he needs to sell copy, and digging up and selling dirt on people is what he's about. At least for now.
    Worst case scenario, as I see it, for Kimmage is to have Lance "caught" at all these things he's accused of. He's out of work then. His best bet is to hope that LA continues on his present path and sheds all of this like water off a ducks back. Then he can continue his dirt digging. Or truth digging for those of you of the other persuasion.
    It's somewhat ironic that without Lance, Kimmage would probably be just be some obscure writer.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    dennisn wrote:
    It's somewhat ironic that without Lance, Kimmage would probably be just be some obscure writer.

    Because Kimmage is a cycling journalist, right Dennis?

    Here's a clue. He's not. He's a sports journalist.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • afx237vi
    afx237vi Posts: 12,630
    Isn't Kimmage some kind of golfist writer these days?
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Article should be online tonight.

    A couple of people in the wasteland that is cyclingnews forums appear to have seen it and say it's very good.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • sagalout
    sagalout Posts: 338
    knedlicky wrote:
    whiteboytrash wrote:
    http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2010/06/28/daily30.html
    Cyclist Lance Armstrong's philanthropic product line— made famous by the iconic, yellow Livestrong bracelets — will hit stores outside of the U.S., U.K., France and Canada Thursday.
    Nike are also offering a service whereby you can send in a message of hope or inspiration and they will have a machine write it in yellow chalk on the road somewhere along the Tour route and let you know by email the GPS coordinates of where they have written your text. They hope to receive, then write 100,000 texts.
    I don’t like it, chalk messages by an organisation as a sales gimmick; chalking on the road is for the enthusiastic fan, not for messages of hope. The idea reminds me of the fairy tale The Wolf and the 7 Little Goats, in which the wolf eats chalk in order to fake the tone of his voice and fool the little goats.
    The machine is fed your text via computer so the driver of the machine never reads it, and the style will always be the same, so the chalking on the road is very impersonal. Fortunately, TV will probably never pick it up, and hopefully it will be in the middle of nowhere, well away from roadside fans, especially the holy messages of hope or inspiration, which I’m sure some will be.
    Although on the other hand, I suppose there is the odd appropriate one in the psalms … “I lift up my eyes to the hills, where does my help come from?”

    They did this last year too - it's not new
  • mercsport
    mercsport Posts: 664
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Kimmage wades in:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... ansparency
    Worst case scenario, as I see it, for Kimmage is to have Lance "caught" at all these things he's accused of. He's out of work then.
    Dennis, you're talking out of your hat again. Kimmage is a very good and well respected scribbler on the Times. His output about cycling is but a tiny fraction of his annual output. Yes, he's a sports journalist, and Britain, like the US is still not a cycling nation on our sports pages. When he writes about biking it's mostly because he cares about it.
    "Lick My Decals Off, Baby"
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    edited July 2010
    dennisn wrote:

    Worst case scenario, as I see it, for Kimmage is to have Lance "caught" at all these things he's accused of. He's out of work then. His best bet is to hope that LA continues on his present path and sheds all of this like water off a ducks back. Then he can continue his dirt digging. Or truth digging for those of you of the other persuasion.
    It's somewhat ironic that without Lance, Kimmage would probably be just be some obscure writer.

    Honestly Dennis, at least be slightly familiar with your target. Kimmage won the William Hill Sports Book of the Year* (a big deal in British Sports writing) before Armstrong was even a Pro, and has been one the Sports Writers Award for best interviewer for the last five years. Most of the time he covers sports other than cycling.

    I'm not particularly a fan as I find his articles as much about himself as his subject. But to say he owes everything to LA and would be out of a job is hopelessly ill informed.



    *Ironically, Armstrong's book also won this award.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    It's somewhat ironic that without Lance, Kimmage would probably be just be some obscure writer.

    Because Kimmage is a cycling journalist, right Dennis?

    Here's a clue. He's not. He's a sports journalist.

    No, because if there were no Lance then would you even know Kimmage's name?
    However, if there were no Kimmage you would still know Lance's. Right?
    And to be honest the word journalist is starting to have less and less meaning to me personally. I used to have some respect for them, but with their move toward entertainment I've lost interest. Used to enjoy watching the news on TV but lately it seems that all they want to do is yell at me, lecture me, and chastise me for not CARING
    enough.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    I read Rough Ride when it came out, in 1990. That's a good two years before even the most dedicated cycling fan knew who the f**k Lance Armstrong was.

    To paraphrase Rich, you're hopelessly ill-informed.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    I knew Kimmage's name before I knew Lance's name Dennis.

    Can I ask an honest question? Do you think you know what you're talking about, or do you know you don't but don't care?
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    I knew Kimmage's name before I knew Lance's name Dennis.

    Can I ask an honest question? Do you think you know what you're talking about, or do you know you don't but don't care?

    H*ll, I don't know if I know what I'm talking about. I'm just putting thoughts out there. I thought that's what a forum was about? OK, so you knew Kimmage before LA. I'd never heard of him, at all, before Lance. So that sort of makes him sort of a celeb I guess. When I first heard about him it struck me that he was another writer making a living writing about the lives of big time celeb's. Which, by the way, holds about zero interest for me. Although as far as book sales go, it seems that bunches of people love that kind of stuff. Can't fault his subject choice in that respect.
    There, more banter for you to decipher. :wink::wink:
  • rockmount
    rockmount Posts: 761
    afx237vi wrote:
    Isn't Kimmage some kind of golfist writer these days?
    Knows feck all about that either !
    .. who said that, internet forum people ?
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    dennisn wrote:
    Although as far as book sales go, it seems that bunches of people love that kind of stuff. Can't fault his subject choice in that respect.

    So here are his recent articles for the Times. You might notice there are no article about Lance.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... l_kimmage/

    So again, what subject choice is that? Athletes?
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Although as far as book sales go, it seems that bunches of people love that kind of stuff. Can't fault his subject choice in that respect.

    So here are his recent articles for the Times. You might notice there are no article about Lance.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... l_kimmage/

    So again, what subject choice is that? Athletes?

    YES????? I think. I give up. You win. Ya lost me there. I'm wrong. I think. :oops: :oops:
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    dennisn wrote:
    When I first heard about him it struck me that he was another writer making a living writing about the lives of big time celeb's. Which, by the way, holds about zero interest for me. Although as far as book sales go, it seems that bunches of people love that kind of stuff.
    The sales figures on sites like Amazon.com clearly show that if you want to make money selling book about the like of Armstrong the way to do it is not to write a doping expose, but rather to write something to help all the fan-boys maintain their delusions...

Categories