Sydney Morning Herald. (August 24 2012). 'Lance Armstrong drops drug fight' by Jim Vertuno. http://www.smh.com.au/sport/lance-armstrong-drops-drugs-fight-20120824-24qjz.html
"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, 'Enough is enough'," said lance Armstrong at a press meeting regarding the allegations concerning his potential doping during his illustrious professional cycling career. The Us Anti Doping agency, USADA, is investigating Armstrong for the use of banned substances such as blood boosters such as epoetin alfa and steroids as well as blood transfusions. Having retired from cycling only recently in 2011, Armstrong has continued to be a leader and role model in the cycling world. These allegations have outraged the cycling world and threaten to prompt a wide scale review of doping results and methods from the last decade. Already a massive problem in the sport, the allegations against the sports biggest star and achiever bring into question the legitimacy of the sport and threaten to turn away supporters and sponsors. With fellow tour winner and todays best cycling talent Alberto Contador being banned for a second time concerning doping, these allegations may push the sport into a wide scale re-evaluation and restructuring. COnsidered to be one of the most marketable sports personalities in the modern world, Lance will most likely now lose his contracts with Nike and Specialized. His charity, the Live-Strong Foundation. will also take a hit as Armstrong is the current director and will have to distance itself from him and re-establish its image. His well publicised battle against cancer and his resilience in returning to the sport of cycling after his battle ensured Lance in the hearts of people all across the world, his unwillingness to continue to fight this allegations is perhaps proof to many of his guiltiness. The loss of Lance the cyclist also most likely means the loss of Lance the philanthropist.
Jim Vertuno a well respected Cycling analyst and personality usually writes with a fair amount of emotive descriptives and often gives clever personal insight and opinions through out his smh cycling articles. This article however is obvious in it's attempt at objectivity. It is apparent that he is obviously deeply disturbed and/or saddened, angered by these development and their obvious scale. Unwilling to comment more existentially on the incident he is seemingly waiting for more information to make a judgment. The possibility that he has been advised to write in this objective traditional reporting style so as to appeal to a more generic universal audience due to the wide scale interest that the story is generating.
ESPN (Entertainment and Sports Programming Network). (October 10 2012). 'Case Closed: Armstrong Doped'. http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/8487169/usada-report-lance-armstrong-end-debate-whether-doped
Not scared of suggesting what the general consensus is thinking, Bonnie Ford, attacks people who are still sceptical of doping allegations against Lance Armstrong. Referencing the article (http://espn.go.com/olympics/cycling/story/_/id/8486013/11-teammates-testified-case-lance-armstrong-usada-says) concerning the 26 witnesses 11 of which are former teammates, alongside scientific evidence brought forth by USADA, Ford successfully outlines the sufficiency of the argument against the cycling star. Although some what subjective her article still outlines the simple truths of the allegations and evidence. The sad truth of being so successful in the sporting world is the allegations of misconduct through doping etc, was relevant for Armstrong. Dogged by 15 years of suggestions at foul play he always aggressively denied doping. The fiery article talks about this deception and outlines the potential for this incident to not only re-write Armstrong sporting epitaph, but all those around him also. Fellow teammates and staff across his cycling teams Motorola, Us Postal, UCI Proteam, Team RadioShack and Astana are implicated alongside sporting and doping officials. This incident is incredibly embarrassing for the sport of cycling. Many argue however it was inevitable that sports ugly and dirty underground would eventually be exposed due to it's scale and level of acceptance that exists for doping, "everyone does it".
At the centre of the allegations where the collection of confessions of a generation of riders close to Armstrong. It was ironic many thought that had Armstrong never made his comeback and stirred the pot it was a close certainty that the code of silence observed in the peloton would still be intact. Some of the most astounding reports suggest at stockpiles of cortisone creams, steroid pills and vials of erythropoietin by team doctors. It was no secret that Armstrong could be a vocal and intimidating competitor and often teammate. His rivalry with with a young up and coming teammate at the time, Alberto Contador was well documented. Other evidence put forth against Armstrong consisted of aggressive and suggestive texts sent to a former teammates Levi Leipheimer about his wife, after Levi was considering revealing his own and the teams doping practices.
Ford seems to think and is generally supported by other articles concerning this issue, in predicting that armstrong will be stripped of his titles in what will be a sad day for cycling and the sporting world. Who would then receive the titles? And whats to say they where not doping also?
USADA's Witnesses
A look at the former teammates of Lance Armstrong who were listed as key witnesses in the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's case against the famed cyclist:
George Hincapie: Only cyclist with Armstrong for all seven of his Tour de France victories (1999-2005) and one of Armstrong's most trusted lieutenants. His testimony detailing participating in a doping program and Armstrong's drug use is considered crucial to USADA's case because of their friendship, although the two reportedly have not spoken in several months.
Tyler Hamilton: Rode with Armstrong from 1998 to 2001. Detailed complex team doping program of drug use and blood transfusions in testimony and his recent book, "The Secret Race." Said Armstrong gave him EPO and took blood transfusions. Twice banned for doping and stripped of his 2004 Olympic gold medal.
Floyd Landis: U.S. Postal Service team rider from 2002 to '04. Was first rider to give investigators explicit detail of complex team doping program. Won 2006 Tour de France with a different team but was later stripped of that victory for steroid use. His testimony helped launch federal criminal probe of Armstrong and Postal team that was closed in February with no charges filed.
Frankie Andreu: Armstrong teammate from 1992 to 2000, one-time roommate and friend for several years. Co-captain of the 2000 Postal team. Andreu and his wife, Betsy, said Armstrong told doctors treating his cancer in 1996 that he used performance-enhancing drugs.
Michael Barry: Armstrong teammate from 2002 to '05. Said he participated in doping program.
Tom Danielson: Armstrong teammate in 2005. Spoke about his experience as a young rider on the team.
Levi Leipheimer: Well-respected American rider who was Armstrong teammate for five years on Postal (2000-01), Astana (2009) and RadioShack (2010-11). Described knowledge of doping program.
Christian Vande Velde: Postal team rider from 1998 to 2003. Testified Armstrong was enforcer of team doping program.
Jonathan Vaughters: Armstrong teammate from 1998 to '99 and current director of Garmin-Slipstream team, who testified about EPO use and Postal's system to avoid drug testers.
David Zabriskie: Postal rider from 2001 to '04. Testified about doping climate on the team.
Stephen Swart: Rode with Armstrong on Motorola team in 1995. Said Armstrong wanted team to begin doping program.
--The Associated Press
Nordicom Review, 2, 3-15. Wien, C. (2005). ‘Defining Objectivity within Journalism’.
Wien outlines the importance for objectivity in disseminating news. She discusses the importance of the pursuit for ultimate and hidden truths inorder for journalism to maintain it's professionalism. It is journalists responsibility not to mislead and only bring for the true elements of a story in order to create a relevant and balanced piece of journalism. Wein acknowledges the inevitability of embellishment and selective reasoning in the interest of societies interest, but still stresses the vitality of not over doing these elements and holding onto the elements of truth. Only by structuring articles to give an insight into the reality of what actually or is really happening are people able to remained informed and develop socially. The subjective reality of maintaining objectiveness is also noted and is explained as susceptible to bias' and contextual influences that surround all people in their perception of issues and developments. Many issues or incidents are open to interpretation and can ultimately provide a wide array of truths specific to the individual.
By achieving objectivity society may discover for itself the truth and decide on a course of progression or action. Objectivity allows for a freedom of interpretation and empowers audiences to there own assertions. Through factuality and impartiality a journalist maintains their integrity.
Precision objective journalism is an artform and is deteriorating with the development of social media frameworks. The immediate information possible in this regard is both a integral resource in a increasingly competitive industry and a toxic mix of bias and rumour portrayed as truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment