PDA

View Full Version : How credible is L'Equipe?


Jakeev
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:05 PM
On the latest controversy of doping about Sesil Karatantcheva, I was just wondering how credible a publication L'Equipe is?

From what I am reading, the magazine seems to print items that are not totally factual and I am just wondering why there isn't more of an uproar against that publication?

If these allegations against Sesil are false I hope they are prepared for one major lawsuit......

manu32
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:14 PM
it's not a good paper at a lot of point of view....but they are very serious in investigations and they never had bad lawsuit.....

timafi
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:16 PM
when it comes down to doping,they get my vote of confidence

Helen Lawson
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:17 PM
If it was just something vague about her testing positive, I might think it was overblown or something like with Svetlana last year (though potentially WTA did damage control for its US Open champion), but these details about claiming to be knocked up at 15 and stuff, I can't believe any non-tabloid rag would make up details like that.

Gallofa
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:21 PM
I tend to think they are quite credible when it comes to doping scandals. Unethical, but credible.

jrm
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:24 PM
Looking worldwide, Sesil is nobody and news about her potencial doping didn't raise any eyebrows outside tennis circuit!

nouf
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:29 PM
good wallpaper with goods sources

azinna
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:40 PM
It's very good when reporting on actual sporting events (matches, games, etc) and open interviews. When it comes to doping scandals, however, its attitude is to disregard the intricate check systems various sports have developed for handling samples and "positive" results.

If you feel anti-doping committees conspire to protect the industry's stars, then L'Equippe becomes the Robin Hood of Sports Media, snatching samples and results from laboratries, exposing culprits before they've got their lawyers and PR people set, and forcing the Powers That Be to punish those they were planning to chide.

But if you feel the intricate check, re-check and private hearings system is there for an ethical reason (perhaps to prevent the presumption of guilt and besmirching of names), then L'Equippe starts to seem a little reckless and thoughtless, even unethical.

saby
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:48 PM
well, when you know "l'équipe" is the most sports newspaper sold in france.
You can buy it in a lot of countries and they have their own tv channel.

I think you can trust what they are saying, they have too much stakes to risk everything.

Laikade
Dec 20th, 2005, 10:56 PM
Very credible even if they are too much sensitive (in my opinion) when it comes to talk about doping...

You'll soon have an idea of their credibility since they were the first to reveal that Puerta was doped (some weeks ago) and Puerta's case will be decided this week:
http://www.eurosport.co.uk/home/pages/v4/l2/s57/e11507/sport_lng2_spo57_evt11507_sto804910.shtml

cartmancop
Dec 20th, 2005, 11:02 PM
I agree with the comment that Sesil doping didn't raise eyebrows away from the tennis world. I don't think they would go through the trouble to make it up about someone like her. If it were a someone like JHH or Maria, then I would be suspicious...

Corswandt
Dec 20th, 2005, 11:11 PM
I tend to think they are quite credible when it comes to doping scandals. Unethical, but credible.

Bullseye.

The real problem lies not in L'Équipe's accuracy, but on their policy of divulging doping news before the alleged offenders are formally charged or even officially notified.

This, BTW, shows they have informers willing to tip them off at the anti-doping agencies/departments, presumably even at the labs that do the testing.

vogus
Dec 20th, 2005, 11:20 PM
the paradox about something as secretive as a doping scandal is that you will never uncover the real story unless you use some dirty tactics yourself in investigating it. So it comes down to, which is worse, sleazy information gathering techniques, or the actual doping? This is an age-old question of journalism of any kind really. And the answer is usually that the benefits of exposing the crime are worth a certain amount of sleaze in the investigation process.

hablo
Dec 20th, 2005, 11:21 PM
I think it's a credible magazine too.

and I don't think they would risk their reputation with a lawsuit by publishing false information.

Corswandt
Dec 21st, 2005, 12:28 AM
the paradox about something as secretive as a doping scandal is that you will never uncover the real story unless you use some dirty tactics yourself in investigating it. So it comes down to, which is worse, sleazy information gathering techniques, or the actual doping? This is an age-old question of journalism of any kind really. And the answer is usually that the benefits of exposing the crime are worth a certain amount of sleaze in the investigation process.

What you wrote here would make sense if we were talking about a wrongful conduct about which the competent authorities had no knowledge - then, sleazy journalism would be (arguably) acceptable, since it was the only way of making sure the culprits wouldn't get away with their evil ways.

But the competent authorities *do* have knowledge, but choose not to disclose it immediately so as not to ruin the reputation of the alleged offenders with accusations that may later turn out to be unsubstantiated or even downright false.

Now - and answering objections in advance - I'm also aware that there may be other reasons behind the official anti-doping agencies decisions not to disclose info regarding certain athletes, and splashing it across L'Équipe's front page may be the only way to smoke out the aforementioned agencies and to bring an athlete's wrongful conduct into the open. But is that *always* the case? Since the end result of jumping the gun can be nothing less than the complete destruction of a sportsman/sportswoman's public image, the press would do well to consider treading more wearily in these cases.