The usual from the NYT

[Al in NYC]

The New York Times can barely stir themselves to cover the Worlds, but then they run something like this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/31/sports/whats-real-in-track-its-hard-to-know.html?ref=sports

This story certainly isn't wrong. But it's pretty disturbing to use this as the click-bait subject of the end of the meet feature story, rather than a look back at any of the action that actually happened on the track and in the field.

When they start covering the obvious use of performance-enhancers in the NFL with this much scrutiny, and call out and question the results of such highly profitable sports, then I might take their coverage of this issue a little more seriously. But this just seems to be yet some more cheap moralizing over a problem that plagues ALL sports, at the easy expense of a "minor" (well, every 4 years, semi-major) sport that has actually struggled to address the problem.

[booond]

The New York Times can barely stir themselves to cover the Worlds, but then they run something like this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/31/sports/whats-real-in-track-its-hard-to-know.html?ref=sports

This story certainly isn't wholly wrong. But it's really disturbing to use this as the click-bait subject of the end of the meet feature story, rather than a look at any of the action that actually happened on the track and in the field.

When they start covering the obvious use of performance-enhancers in the NFL with this much scrutiny, and call out and question that highly profitable sport's results, then I might take their coverage of this issue a little more seriously. But this just seems to be yet some more cheap moralizing over a problem that plagues ALL sports, at the easy expense of a "minor" (every 4 years, semi-major) sport.

The big problem isn't PEDs in the NFL but concussions. The NYT, PBS, and, now, Hollywood, are covering that. Not that PEDS aren't a problem but they are more a given.

[Atticus]

But it's pretty disturbing to use this as the click-bait subject of the end of the meet feature story, rather than a look back at any of the action that actually happened on the track and in the field.

Perhaps their journalistic investigatory resources would be better spent looking at the drugs used in the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc., where the MILLIONS of fans turn a blind eye. Clucking at the speck in our eye, and ignoring the motes in the eyes of the bigger sports, is, to say the least, hypocritical.

[booond]

Perhaps their journalistic investigatory resources would be better spent looking at the drugs used in the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc., where the MILLIONS of fans turn a blind eye. Clucking at the speck in our eye, and ignoring the motes in the eyes of the bigger sports, is, to say the least, hypocritical.

Fans of MLB don't turn a blind eye. They may not realize the day-to-day but get into any discussion about Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens and you'll understand how some feel. No one cares about the players in the NFL. It is all about teams. Players are part of an assembly line. I'm not sure if PEDS are as prevalent in the NBA as ganja.

BTW, it's not the NYT's fault that the IAAF and WADA have no control over the problem yet they make it sound like they do.

[gh]

I think you actually might find that the NYT filed more quality stories from Beijing than any other American paper.

[KDFINE]

The Times' articles seemed to put the the PED's issue in the forefront. The body of their articles also gave heights and distances in metric rather than Imperial measures, which to me means that they really don't care about really reporting the sport to their readership. The had a nice piece a week ago about Andy Pettite (retired baseball pitcher for those not in the know) being honored by the N.Y. Yankees having his number retired without once mentioning his use of human growth hormone. I concur, they have a double standard in their reporting.

[Atticus]

Fans of MLB don't turn a blind eye. They may not realize the day-to-day but get into any discussion about Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens and you'll understand how some feel

Condemning the known users, but not caring at all about the flawed process at uncovering the users is NOT a fan base that cares about PEDs.

[booond]

Fans are supposed to be protesting the process? Where are the scores of TnF fans picketing WADA and the IAAF? At least the Yankees and Dodgers have to go through the same flawed process in baseball while many "teams" in TnF can skip the process altogether or, allegedly, bribe whomever is in charge.

People in glass houses...

[Al in NYC]

I think you actually might find that the NYT filed more quality stories from Beijing than any other American paper.

Perhaps (don't know, since I don't read any other American paper), but their coverage did seem well below what it has been in the past. And, like KDFine said, they seemed determined to mention the PEDs issues prominently. Then, they finish with this rather cheap story. Again, I don't think it's wrong necessarily, but it does seem wrongheaded, and has no review at all of the competition itself.

[KDFINE]

There was another element in the Times' coverage that I forgot to mention. Every day in their sports section there is a listing of the sports that are to be televised that day. Now they don't list everything to be televised as they omit a number of the "lesser" cable channels. Universal Sports and BEIN are never listed. However, on both weekends they didn't bother to give the listing for network TVs NBC. That was either because they didn't feel that it was important enough or it was a statement about what they suspected would be the worth of NBC's coverage. Their reporting, concentrating on drugs unlike American professional sports which are pretty much give a pass, the lack of TV listings, and their laziness by not converting metric heights and distances in their stores convinced me that they really aren't interested in covering the championships as sport, but mainly as whatever scandal they can dig up.

[tandfman]

I agree with KDFINE's observations. I must ask, however, if he or anyone else knows of an American newspaper outside the state of Oregon that does any better?

[Al in NYC]

Most newspapers in the U.S. are struggling just to stay afloat, and rarely send reporters to any place outside of their local area. Hell, a fair number of papers have even stopped sending reporters on the road with local sports teams. So, no, I suspect that most U.S. newspapers, if they gave any space to the WC at all, just reprinted wire copy on the meet.

But to ask "did any paper do better?" is, it seems to me, to miss the point. The NYT, although not immune to the economics of the newspaper business, is still different and covers a whole range of topics and events much more widely and in greater depth than pretty much any other newspaper in the country. And this "newspaper of record" chose to frame much of its coverage of Track & Field's biggest event through the lens of PED usage.

Capped by a feature story at the end of the meet that didn't highlight any of the exciting action or great athletes, but instead openly questioned and nearly dismissed all of the results. A level of scrutiny about PEDs and competitive integrity issue that no other sport is subjected to in their pages.

[1runner1]

All other sports are handled carefully re: PED's because of money until some big name gets busted. Then everyone is in a tizzy for a while 'til it dies down and the bucks keep flowing. T&F has no such luxury..no influx of money and less and less tv coverage every year. Basically, NO ONE CARES!

[NotDutra5]

Perhaps (don't know, since I don't read any other American paper), but their coverage did seem well below what it has been in the past. And, like KDFine said, they seemed determined to mention the PEDs issues prominently. Then, they finish with this rather cheap story. Again, I don't think it's wrong necessarily, but it does seem wrongheaded, and has no review at all of the competition itself.

Why blame the NYT or any media outlet for mentioning PEDs at seemingly every possible turn. The sport itself and it's fanbase eats its own with this subject.

[Alan Shank]

The Times' articles seemed to put the the PED's issue in the forefront. The body of their articles also gave heights and distances in metric rather than Imperial measures, which to me means that they really don't care about really reporting the sport to their readership.

Well, the heights and distances are in metric in the results, of course. The newspaper would have to convert them (and know how to); couldn't be bothered. OK by me.
Cheers,
Alan Shank