WSJ Triathlon Article (Page 3)

Forum guidelines BT super discount
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » WSJ Triathlon Article Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 3
 
 
2005-08-29 2:56 PM
in reply to: #234380

User image

Master
1927
100050010010010010025
Chicago
Subject: RE: WSJ Triathlon Article

Chris,

I won't belittle this point. But the WSJ is the No. 1 newspaper in the country. Millions of people read it. And in short if you're goal is individual and just all about you then you might not care what those millions think but if you want better trails, better parks, more open water swim venues, better technology for equipment, resources etc., for the sport of triathlon then it does matter what others beside myself think of the sport. And the WSJ is one of the most influential newspapers out there so to have them print such a blatant and irresponsible article that doesn't come close to painting an accurate picture of the sport hurts all of us even thouse who are just out for individual gain. Public opinion does matter if we want to grow the sport. And I rathered we have a say in shaping that public opinion than those who do not treasure it as we do.



2005-08-29 3:44 PM
in reply to: #234380

User image

Expert
1213
1000100100
Los Gatos, CA
Subject: RE: WSJ Triathlon Article
The real story to report is how tri has gone mass market, no longer the exclusive domain of the elite athlete. It is true that Tri has become mega business, a sports phenomenon. You can't flip through Triathlete magazine without seeing 2 or 3 Jesse Stensmark ads. Would have been quite appropriate for the WSJ to talk about that, considering it is a business publication.

Her chosen angle on going soft, posers etc. is of course highly biased and bullshit, reeks of controversy and sensationalism as if she's breaking a major news story, and that's what's bothering people here, rightfully so. Tri is such a positive growth trend in society, considering mass obesity in America etc. BT is loaded w/ stories of people who have transformed themselves against incredible odds, now that would have been a worthy angle. This reporter is a cynical person.
2005-08-29 3:47 PM
in reply to: #234380

User image

Pro
3906
20001000500100100100100
St Charles, IL
Subject: RE: WSJ Triathlon Article
Had a reply here. But I don't see the point. We simply interpret the article in different ways.

"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence"

I think we all feel that triathlons have been a very positive aspect of our lives, and do them for reasons that are important to us, not because a WSJ article said they were easy. The reality of how easy or hard they are is relative to each of us, and isn't swayed by a single piece of journalism. Reality is unrelenting that way.

-C


Edited by coredump 2005-08-29 4:07 PM
2005-08-29 4:24 PM
in reply to: #234380

User image

Veteran
340
10010010025
Greenville, NC
Subject: RE: WSJ Triathlon Article
Lance Armstrong
National sprint triathlon Champion, 1989

Yeah it's a sport for posers.

I agree that the sport has gotten a bit soft. BUT I've rethought my similar belief that this is a bad thing. It's not. We live in a country where obesity is rampant. Any encouragement to get active is a good thing. If making 'non-athletes' feel like they can/should call themselves triathletes helps then bring it on. I've never had to qualify my own belief in myself as a triathlete even though I've never done a distance event. I don't think Justin Gatlin considers himself any less a runner than Paul Tergat. Neither do I.
2005-08-29 4:55 PM
in reply to: #234380

User image

Extreme Veteran
404
100100100100
Chicago, Il
Subject: RE: WSJ Triathlon Article
I just have to say after my race yesterday, anyone who can blithely write that the olympic distance race "can be completed in under two hours" is an ass! Sure it can, but not by many.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » WSJ Triathlon Article Rss Feed  
 
 
of 3