Originally Posted by
e-RICHIE Forget EPO and the testing for it that is part of this chapter – even IF it’s behind the times. Riders get away with (ab)use on a regular basis because the org and the testers are typically a half-step or even a generation behind them. Before the EPO era it was ____ . After the EPO era it will likely be ____ . The issue I have here is touched upon in the original text. Some writers are too close to the all of this for the good of anything. A true journalist – a real journalist – would write about what he heard, or knew, in real time. He wouldn’t wait until it’s fashionable or accepted practice to go against the grain.
These days, more people from the pro ranks are speaking about their experiences. No one was ever fooled by what is being served up atmo. We all knew that PEDs use was part of this sport going back to week one, year one. But the fans love the drama, and the vistas shown on the feeds and in magazine pages when reports are printed a month later, and all the beauty that is bicycle racing. We have accepted the back story because the rewards to us have been worth the watching. But no one ever likes being lied to, or to be condescended upon. That is what we have been exposed to since the Lance Inc thing became this current news story (again). He and his co-conspirators will get their just due, the public hanging they deserve, or they’ll get away with a slap on the wrist and have to spend eternity dealing with their consciences.
My point (in my first reply above) is that the writers HAVE to tell the stories, and tell them in a timely way. If JW is at all intimating that he “knew something was up…” but only now, in this climate, has decided to expose it, I think – fine, better late than not at all. But where were all of these hunches and hearsay stored before the current USADA chapter made talking about what you did/saw/knew/heard a varsity sport?
Men like Paul Kimmage and Willy Voet get my respect for stepping up to the mic and telling their stories when they happened. These men are sports journalists and should be held in high regard. Anyone else who followed the races, the racers, and the related stories and wrote nothing (until writing anything at all became the new black) might not be complicit (to use that word…). But it could be argued that, in suppressing it, he’s less of a reporter and more of a press secretary for the sport he’s covering.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Where are the 'journalists' in cycling? 
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks