Armstrong's propaganda war.

Seanos

BikingBernie wrote:

Armstrong has long been a master of manipulating the public mind via the Internet and media

I've heard he lives in a hollowed out volcano on a private island and controls the New World Order from there

BikingBernie wrote:

Given his previous history how far do people think that Armstrong's camp will go in their attempts to attempt to discredit the current Federal investigation and those who give evidence?

Probably not to the extent of getting someone to post nutjob messages on internet forums

BikingBernie wrote:

Two threads have just been erased that, as Iain pointed out, read as though they were the product of an 'Astroturfing' campaign by a company such as Public Strategies.

Really? Are PR companies that inept?

BikingBernie wrote:

I would say that Armstrong's lawyer, Tim Herman, is already doing a good job of doing this by virtue of his Ad hominem attacks on those speaking out about Armstrong's doping...

You know you have to be able to prove that Armstrong doped in order to go around saying he did?

Just saying.,.

Kléber

The troll is back I see.

Gazzaputt

iainf72 wrote:

Gazzaputt wrote:

Until there is positive test with his name written on it or he confesses for me there is no case. I believe like all riders he pushed the boundaries.

I'm curious, if it went to court and he was found guilty but without a confession or positive test, would you believe / accept it?

[I realise he won't go on trial for doping but fraud etc will hinge on doping]

As you say he won't be found guilty on doping.

As Lance he has never tested positive and history shows this. Boundaries and limits are there to be pushed but why would you incriminate yourself now?

I suppose this all depends what you term 'clean riding'. Limits are set to be adhered to.

The Prodigy

Kléber wrote:

The troll is back I see.

Not for long, what a total waste of time. I come on here to see whats going on in the racing world since the last time I checked, about 5 hours ago, and this rubbish is the hot topic of the day. I would have Lance shot, just for the amount of space he takes up on this forum.

jimmythecuckoo

Kléber wrote:

The troll is back I see.

Is this Chapeau?

Seanos

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Kléber wrote:

The troll is back I see.

Is this Chapeau?

Are you referring to me?

Kléber

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Kléber wrote:

The troll is back I see.

Is this Chapeau?

Yes, for all of five minutes. His appearance this afternoon was even more short-lived than this morning's ramblings. The postings were seemingly identical to this morning's guff.

jimmythecuckoo

Seanos wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Kléber wrote:

The troll is back I see.

Is this Chapeau?

Are you referring to me?

no idea.

Pross

No, I think Chapeau actually make a brief re-appearance.

Pross

Back again with a post count of 1. Exactly the same post. Seems a bit odd that even a fanboy would keep re-registering just to post the same thing over and over again!

jimmythecuckoo

I have posted in the thread whilst it is still there !

Monty Dog

As long as we get the apologist - nay, distortionists who keep regurgitating the unsubstantiated 'never tested positive' or 'most tested ever' then I'm afraid that people are going to post to the contrary. The fact that he's been the most divisive, distortionist and often loathed figure in pro-cycling in many years who has both conspired to cheat, manipulate cycling's governing body and now the media to support his personal agenda whilst 'protecting' himself under some mantle of 'godliness' certainly warrants comment. For some, the prospect of the truth is starting to get uncomfortable.

Gingerflash

I don'tpost on here much, hardly at allon doping issues, although I do keep up to date on the latest goings on.

I used to love Lance, up to about Tour 5. I've gone off the guy over thge last few years and am probably neutral these days. As for doping, I really want the truth to come out in a fair and balanced way, whatever that truth might be. However, I hope to god that the truth of the past is that Armstrong was clean.

It really bothers me is that so many people on here seem to hope that the truth is that Armstrong has cheated throughout his career. No doubt some will say that they know for certain that he is a doper but the more sensible would probably accept that nothing has yet been proven, they just hope it will.

This really is like Turkeys hoping for Christmas. Cycling, in the eyes of the public at large, will be beyond the pale, finished, a joke. For the greatest "sporting hero" of recent decades to be proven to have cheated throughout - the end. Does anyone really think that an Armstrong conviction would help the sport's image?

I'm not suggesting things be brushed under the carpet; I'm very keen that the truth is revealed. However, I'm worried what that truth might be and what it'll do to our sport. It seems some are desparately hoping for an outcome that would spell utter disaster.

Abdoujaparov

Having read Chapeau's post and seen the repeated attempts to post it, I think there's a good chance it was written by someone who has a strong interest in the trial - more than what you'd expect any fan to have.

First step in getting to the bottom of this, is to identify what effect it has had or what effect it could reasonably be expected to have. There's a chance that people would take it at face value, think worse of Greg Lemond and that he would be in some way discredited, but I'm not sure if that could realistically be expected by anyone with an ounce of sense and involved in the trial. Bear in mind, this sort of smear campaign would not originate from a PR company - it would come from the legal team involved in the trial who would then use a PR company to help them realise their legal objectives.

Now would a legal team really expect this forum to swallow the Greg Lemound smear hook, line and sinker? I doubt it.

More likely is that it was done as a test of public sentiment ahead of the trial or that it fits in some way with a strategy of discrediting cycling doping smears.

In any case, Chapeau's actions look pretty fishy to me.

AidanR

Gingerflash wrote:

I don'tpost on here much, hardly at allon doping issues, although I do keep up to date on the latest goings on.

I used to love Lance, up to about Tour 5. I've gone off the guy over thge last few years and am probably neutral these days. As for doping, I really want the truth to come out in a fair and balanced way, whatever that truth might be. However, I hope to god that the truth of the past is that Armstrong was clean.

It really bothers me is that so many people on here seem to hope that the truth is that Armstrong has cheated throughout his career. No doubt some will say that they know for certain that he is a doper but the more sensible would probably accept that nothing has yet been proven, they just hope it will.

This really is like Turkeys hoping for Christmas. Cycling, in the eyes of the public at large, will be beyond the pale, finished, a joke. For the greatest "sporting hero" of recent decades to be proven to have cheated throughout - the end. Does anyone really think that an Armstrong conviction would help the sport's image?

I'm not suggesting things be brushed under the carpet; I'm very keen that the truth is revealed. However, I'm worried what that truth might be and what it'll do to our sport. It seems some are desparately hoping for an outcome that would spell utter disaster.

Meh, it'll be OK. To be honest, cycling has simply opened my eyes - I'm now pretty certain that a lot of sports have big doping problems. At least cycling is kinda doing something about it.

nytransplant

Hello this is my first post, go easy on me. I come from a sports background, and it seems that the future will be about who can afford the best drugs. Steroids are more apparent than ever, and I feel they are fighting a losing battle. To me, I would take more pride in being clean and beating a juicy bear. Thoughts?

Gingerflash

I think that's probably how it's seen with other big doping cases. The public scream "that sport's a disgrace" etc and we rebut by pointing to the other sports and saying they're as bad but aren't trying to clean themsleves up.

The Armstrong case would be so much worse. Love him or hate him, his whole "story" has done wonders for our sport in terms of raising its profile and improving its image. For that all to be based on a lie would be catastrophic.

iainf72

Gazzaputt wrote:

As Lance he has never tested positive and history shows this. Boundaries and limits are there to be pushed but why would you incriminate yourself now?

Depends. They could ask him outright in court and he could tell the truth and not go to prison, or lie and go to prison.

If multiple people testify they saw him doping he's in a very difficult place. And everyone involved will be acutely aware that the only folks who did prison time as a result of Balco were those who lied.

Seanos

Abdoujaparov wrote:

Having read Chapeau's post and seen the repeated attempts to post it, I think there's a good chance it was written by someone who has a strong interest in the trial - more than what you'd expect any fan to have.

First step in getting to the bottom of this, is to identify what effect it has had or what effect it could reasonably be expected to have. There's a chance that people would take it at face value, think worse of Greg Lemond and that he would be in some way discredited, but I'm not sure if that could realistically be expected by anyone with an ounce of sense and involved in the trial. Bear in mind, this sort of smear campaign would not originate from a PR company - it would come from the legal team involved in the trial who would then use a PR company to help them realise their legal objectives.

Now would a legal team really expect this forum to swallow the Greg Lemound smear hook, line and sinker? I doubt it.

More likely is that it was done as a test of public sentiment ahead of the trial or that it fits in some way with a strategy of discrediting cycling doping smears.

In any case, Chapeau's actions look pretty fishy to me.

I really think you need a sense of perspective here. Some random posts some garbled toss and you're linking it back to the Kennedy assassination.

:roll:

iainf72

Seanos wrote:

I really think you need a sense of perspective here. Some random posts some garbled toss and you're linking it back to the Kennedy assassination.

It's not far fetched. Remember, it's not just here. Companies like Public Strategies use public platforms etc to push out a message and forums / blogs are popular for this kind of thing. Also, the guy who runs PS is on the board of Livestrong.

Have a look at the tangled web with the Lemond / Trek case for a bit of info.

It could be a loon, but it could also be an intern in a PR office doing a job.

mididoctors

its a loon

blazing_saddles

Certainly seems this forum is targeted.
No current activity over in the madhouse.(CN forums)
Identical threads suggests it's a bit more organised than the average troll.

jimmythecuckoo

The power of the internet eh?

Homer J

It would be nice if the mods explained why the thread was deleted? As someone has said there are plenty of other deflamatory posts about?

Pross

Wish they would either delete the thread or leave it as it was as my comments on there now just look stupid as there's no context!

jimmythecuckoo

Should it stay or should it go?

mididoctors

It FAILS so hard that if you think its a conspiracy then they are attempting to smear lance by implicating him in an attempt to smear lemond

look... I spend too much time posting on the internets but I am far from being the most self motivated prolific obsessive on the webs

daviesee

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Should it stay or should it go?

If I go there will be trouble
An' if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know

cajun_cyclist

I don't mean to get in the 'fray' of this argument

But in talking about the 'propaganda' war and things being taken off the internet, perhaps it has been stated here but the Underground 13 Matt Decanio website has had to be way toned down, at times not operabl. Also, I use to read some website that was named something like "Stop Lance" or something and that one has been taken down too.

BikingBernie

frenchfighter wrote:

That would be the first I have heard of organisations coming onto forums to defend cyclists.

The use of paid professional 'reputation management' by companies and individuals is very common and they will often use whatever creative means they can to promote their client. The methods range from professional press releases through to covertly supporting sympathetic bloggers and 'Astroturfing' campaigns, including posting supportive messages on forums in the guise of everyday punters.

Wasn't the 'Let Levi Ride' campaign supposed to be an 'Astroturfing' operation?