Please note

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:00 pm

... that the Tour de France is about as interesting to the general population as Iditarod. Let's keep it to the sports pages.

Jackie · **Posted:** Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:32 pm

Which is where we keep the Iditarod (more interesting than the bike race, in my opinion).

SusanV · **Posted:** Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:54 pm

Blanp, that reminds me: How is that there were three separate mentions of that stupid Nathan's hot-dog eating contest--complete with pictures!--in the WP yesterday? One in sports, one in style, and I think the third was in business. Talk about overkill.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Jul 06, 2004 7:04 pm

Got me.

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:40 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
... that the Tour de France is about as interesting to the general population as Iditarod. Let's keep it to the sports pages.<hr></blockquote>If Lance Armstrong wins, I hope you will not object if the story is put on the front page. Winning the tour is perhaps the greatest athletic feat in the world. It's like running a marathon every day for a month. This guy won it after having cancer and now he's trying to break the record for total victories. If he succeeds, that's front page. If he comes close and fails, that's front page. If he's out of it early on, maybe not.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:09 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by ADKbrown:
 This guy won it after having cancer and now he's trying to break the record for total victories. If he succeeds, that's front page. <hr></blockquote>If he succeeds, you could use the same argument next year.
I take nothing from Armstrong's athletic achievement, but it's an athleltic achievement. We have a whole section for that.

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:29 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
If he succeeds, you could use the same argument next year.
I take nothing from Armstrong's athletic achievement, but it's an athleltic achievement. We have a whole section for that.<hr></blockquote>Exceptional athletic achievements should be on the front page. If Bonds breaks Aaron's HR record, for example. But I misstated my position in the earlier post. I said "story," but I'd be satisfied with a good photo on Page 1. Perhaps that's not objectionable.

Dapper Dan · **Joined:** Fri Dec 12, 2003 1:01 am **Posts:** 273

A typical metro daily has a whole section for local news and a whole section for business. I hope I never see anyone argue that local news and business should always be kept off A1.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:52 pm

I worked at a paper that puts sports on the front page too often. But blanp goes too far in the other direction. Sports interests a substantial portion of the population, and there's no reason to keep it off the front page, particularly since the deep association in the American mind between newspapers and sports is part of what keeps the newspaper industry viable in the Internet age.I might not throw Lance out there. On the other hand, I might. He is, after all, an American winning a global event (in France, no less).And ADKbrown is right -- major sports events need to be on the front page of any paper that doesn't want to be quixotic and out of touch. The Super Bowl. The final game of the World Series. Someone breaking the home-run record. These things matter to enough people that we just look silly if we don't play them out front.We have a separate section for business, too -- would you keep a stock-market crash off 1A?

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:14 pm

It's not like I'm suggesting we bury the Super Bowl. This is bicycle racing we're talking about.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:21 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Matthew Grieco:
We have a separate section for business, too -- would you keep a stock-market crash off 1A?<hr></blockquote>No, but a lot of business stories seem to appear on Page One for no apparent reason.

newsdesigner · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:24 pm

Seems to me a decision that should be made on a paper-by-paper basis. Some cities (Colorado Springs) have high local interest in the sport. Some (Austin, Boston) have local connections to some of the protagonists. Besides, Sheryl Crow's there!

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:32 pm

I see no reason why the bike race should be anywhere but the sports section.Except, of course, Armstrong's personal life, which belongs in the People section. Maybe.[ July 07, 2004: Message edited by: Bumfketeer ]

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 2:44 pm

It's a major sports event, even if bicycle racing is not considered a major sport in the United States. If Armstrong, an American, establishes himself as the greatest athlete in this event's history (which a victory this year would more or less ensure), I would not fault any U.S. paper for putting him out front.Nor would I fault a paper for deciding that it belongs on the sports cover. But if I were running a paper, it would go on 1A barring hard news that would make its presence inappropriate.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 3:48 pm

Bicycle racing is not a front-page sport. It's not even a page-2 sport. It's a sports-page sport.

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 4:44 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
Bicycle racing is not a front-page sport. It's not even a page-2 sport. It's a sports-page sport.<hr></blockquote>Any story is a candidate for the front page if it is remarkable enough. Yes, even a story about bicycle racing. If Lance Armstrong wins the Tour for the sixth time, that is a remarkable story. If Americans don't appreciate his achievement, newspapers should educate them by putting the story or at least a photo on the front page.

Jolieblonde · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:23 pm

I gotta agree with you ADKbrown ... I don't even like sports myself, (well loathe would be better word) but if Lance wins the Tour de France for a sixth time in a row, it at least deserves a front-page photo. It's an unprecedented achievement. And frankly there is a lot of interest in Lance.It's a lot more newsworthy than the umpteen routine sports stories that get on p. 1 just because the hometown boys (or girls) win a game---or as we were recently treated to here in Chicago, front page stories because the Cubs and Sox are playing each other for their annual grudge match. And those were preview stories! Spare me. <blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by ADKbrown:

Any story is a candidate for the front page if it is remarkable enough. Yes, even a story about bicycle racing. If Lance Armstrong wins the Tour for the sixth time, that is a remarkable story. If Americans don't appreciate his achievement, newspapers should educate them by putting the story or at least a photo on the front page.<hr></blockquote>

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:15 pm

I would suspect that perhaps 0.8 percent of Americans give a shit about bicycle racing...at best.If someone performed an amazing achievement in hurling (like, perhaps, killing more than one person with a single swing of the club), would that be front-page news too?

Biggdbo · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:56 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Bumfketeer:
I would suspect that perhaps 0.8 percent of Americans give a shit about bicycle racing...at best.<hr></blockquote>I have to disagree. Without Lance Armstrong, maybe. But I think more people are interested simply because of him. I'm a fairly big sports fan, but I have no trouble admitting that I never paid any attention to bicycle racing. Until Lance Arsmstrong won a couple, overcame cancer, then won a couple more. That's what makes it such an interesting story - a man overcomes a terrible disease and goes on to achieve unprecedented success in a worldwide event. While I won't be following it day-by-day (and I don't think it should be on A1 daily), I think that, especially if Armstrong wins it, there should at least be a photo or some sort of prominent teaser on A1. And the argument that "It's sports, it should go in the sports section" is old and ridiculous. As Dapper Dan posted:
<blockquote>quote:<hr>A typical metro daily has a whole section for local news and a whole section for business. I hope I never see anyone argue that local news and business should always be kept off A1.<hr></blockquote>

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:22 pm

I think it's great that Armstrong overcame cancer and went on to win the big bicycle race. But that's an old story.
And you admit that you're interested in Lance Armstrong, not bicycle racing.
It's reminiscent of the uproar over women's soccer when the U.S. team won whatever it is that they won a few years ago. We've barely heard a peep since, and the women's league folded.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:02 am

I wouldn't be surprised if women's soccer isn't popular in Bethesda, Md.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:13 am

"For thrilling competition, Slate says the Tour de France pales next to the 25-game reign of Jeopardy! supercontestant Ken Jennings. The 30-year-old software engineer has won a total of $788,960, beating the previous record-holder by a margin of over $600,000. Watching KenJen play is like witnessing any great athlete in top form: He's the Michael Jordan of trivia, the Seabiscuit of geekdom, and his antics have once again made Jeopardy! required viewing. (Update: 26 wins and $828,960) (Slashdot)***You know where this is leading, and you don't want to go there.***

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:44 am

Everybody I know is talking about that guy, blanp.Of course, he probably isn't the most skillful player in Jeopardy history. He just happens to have come along after they got rid of the 5-game limit.[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: Matthew Grieco ]

Ryminia · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:53 am

I have the complete opposite experience: No one I know is talking about this guy. This is possibly a result of my age group, though I work with a former Tournament of Champions winner, and I've heard nary a peep from her on the subject.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:54 am

And lose the exclamation point in the show title.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:46 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by JessicaN:
This is possibly a result of my age group, though I work with a former Tournament of Champions winner, and I've heard nary a peep from her on the subject.<hr></blockquote>Aww, she's just jealous.And so am I -- of you. I know someone who went on Jeopardy and she finished with negative bucks.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:09 am

The point is not what our friends are talking about; it's what the newspaper audience as a whole is concerned about. I still believe the vast majority of Americans *who read newspapers on a daily basis* are thrilled if an American wins it, particularly an American who's gone through what Lance Armstrong has, but don't see it as page 1 material.
My two cents.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:12 am

I'd rather see it out there than the "My Little Town" tidbits, as blanp calls them, that clutter up so many front pages.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:27 am

I think it gets back to the question of whether newspapers are in business to print what people say they want to know about or what they should want to know about. Or what they'd want to know more about if they knew more about it.And who has the answer to that? Paging Dr. Seuss...

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:52 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
I think it gets back to the question of whether newspapers are in business to print what people say they want to know about or what they should want to know about. Or what they'd want to know more about if they knew more about it.And who has the answer to that? Paging Dr. Seuss...<hr></blockquote>Aside from a few that exist to push a political agenda, newspapers are in business to make money.Those that survive print what people will read. Those of us who care about more than profits will gravitate toward papers that put substance first. But entertainment need not be considered evil.If a newspaper's staff and wires can turn up four or five or six better stories on the day Armstrong wins again, then shunt the cyclist off Page 1. But to see Armstrong's effort as strictly (or even primarily) a sports story is like seeing the release of Bill Clinton's book as a tale of a writer getting a big break.

jmwalsh · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 12:02 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
It's not like I'm suggesting we bury the Super Bowl. This is bicycle racing we're talking about.<hr></blockquote>I love bicycle racing, love the Tour de France and love France. I also think that Armstrong's achievements are remarkable.I also agree with No. 1. It's a minority interest and not front page stuff, except in the case of a small photo and lead in.Mind you, I've seen some bollocks on the front page of newspapers -- you Americans don't know how grim it can get.J...

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:17 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Bumfketeer:
I would suspect that perhaps 0.8 percent of Americans give a shit about bicycle racing...at best.If someone performed an amazing achievement in hurling (like, perhaps, killing more than one person with a single swing of the club), would that be front-page news too?<hr></blockquote>C'mon, Bumf. You know that reader interest is only one element of the equation. Newspapers create interest in a story by placing it on Page 1. That's the point. Besides, there will be a lot of public interest if Armstrong wins, even if the public does not ordinarily give a shit about bicycle racing.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:23 pm

Exactly.Do I give a shit about bicycle racing? No.Do I give a shit about Lance Armstrong. Oddly, yes. And so do a lot of others.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:51 pm

I think Armstrong is an amazing athlete and that his victory over cancer is wonderful.That being said, ask the average "reader" what the rules of bicycle racing are, or what you call the main pack (a word I just found out about two days ago because a neighbor where I'm vacationing is a fan), and I bet not one in 30 can answer.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:41 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Bumfketeer:
I think Armstrong is an amazing athlete and that his victory over cancer is wonderful.<hr></blockquote>Exactly. The appropriate story would be about Armstrong, not the intricacies of the race or sport. <blockquote>quote:<hr>That being said, ask the average "reader" what the rules of bicycle racing are, or what you call the main pack (a word I just found out about two days ago because a neighbor where I'm vacationing is a fan), and I bet not one in 30 can answer.<hr></blockquote>The story -- if one is appropriate that day -- need not be a recitation of the three-week event's details. It's not purely a sports story. The place for the details would be in the sports section.The race ends on a Sunday, if I remember correctly. Let's see how many better stories are available -- and published -- on that Monday's front pages.[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: Wayne Countryman ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:47 pm

How many times must we relate Armstrong's medical history?

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:09 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
How many times must we relate Armstrong's medical history?<hr></blockquote>Now is not the time to begin ignoring it. I get tired of the hype, but when the race ends, it's time for a story.Keep the story tight, with just enough background for context. Include a promo to the sports section. Again, if more important stories are available, fill that Monday front page without the bicyclist. Now, if we could only force people to read every one of those important stories, or even to buy the Monday paper ...

jmcg · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:15 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
I think it's great that Armstrong overcame cancer and went on to win the big bicycle race. But that's an old story.
And you admit that you're interested in Lance Armstrong, not bicycle racing.
It's reminiscent of the uproar over women's soccer when the U.S. team won whatever it is that they won a few years ago. We've barely heard a peep since, and the women's league folded.<hr></blockquote>So now you're acknowledging that Armstrong is a story, which seems to shoot down the Iditarod analogy. I mean, next to no one knows the names of the sled drivers or the dogs, right?

Earl · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:47 pm

If Lance Armstrong does indeed manage to win an unprecedented 6th Tour de France it is, in my opinion, a great story. However, I hope to read about it in the sports section. That tends to be the place I like to get my sports news.However, in an era when the Scott Peterson trial seems to snag front page space on a fairly regular basis, I don't see a problem with a couple of inches below the fold.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:07 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
.
It's reminiscent of the uproar over women's soccer when the U.S. team won whatever it is that they won a few years ago. We've barely heard a peep since, and the women's league folded.<hr></blockquote>And, at risk of causing an uproar here, I think the interest was greatly exaggerated by Brandy Chastain's Gypsy Rose Lee imitation.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:00 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jmcg:
So now you're acknowledging that Armstrong is a story, which seems to shoot down the Iditarod analogy. I mean, next to no one knows the names of the sled drivers or the dogs, right?<hr></blockquote>Huh?

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:06 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Earl:

However, in an era when the Scott Peterson trial seems to snag front page space on a fairly regular basis, I don't see a problem with a couple of inches below the fold.<hr></blockquote>Who?

Earl · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:32 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
Who?<hr></blockquote>Thanks.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:04 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Bumfketeer:
I think Armstrong is an amazing athlete and that his victory over cancer is wonderful.That being said, ask the average "reader" what the rules of bicycle racing are, or what you call the main pack (a word I just found out about two days ago because a neighbor where I'm vacationing is a fan), and I bet not one in 30 can answer.<hr></blockquote>I can't answer. I still think Lance is interesting.I loved baseball long before I understood the infield fly rule.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:15 pm

Sports is sports. Except under extraordinary circumstances, it ain't news.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:21 am

LE GRAND BORNAND, France, July 22 - A high-ranking official among the organizers of the Tour de France said this is the last time Lance Armstrong will compete in the race. (New York Times)***Some might be cheered by that, but I can think only of Michael Jordan.***

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Fri Jul 30, 2004 1:17 am

Newsdesigner.com documented a tiny bit of the vast overkill. I had forgotten to remind everyone that although the bicycle race was in France, it would not be necessary to use French or fake French in the headline. Also, although "six" includes two of the three letters in "sex," there is no reason to write a stupid wordplay headline that depends on that coincidence. The same might be said about the fact that in English, "Lance" rhymes with "France."So there it is: entirely predictable, completely unavoidable and nothing could -- or no one would -- stop it.

Testy Copy Editors

Please note

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links