So let us say Jakob were to run a fairly low 3:26 and Jon asks Jakob about the world record and what does Jakob think about it. Jakob says come again. Jon then says there are questions about the world record and Jakob says what kind of question is that and he says that is not me (questioning it). That question is so rude, says Jakob and he walks away. People might wonder why Jon is asking the question. There is a reason of course but what exactly is the reason? I have a guess…
Wow. With so much going on at Worlds we have 5 pages on a thread started by someone with the screen name "Rojo the clown".
This thread is for the haters! (I'll put the link for you to sign up to the Supporters Club below).
It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. Asking a question does not imply the person who is #2 is dirty, it is implying person #1 is dirty.
When Randy Barnes had the shot put record, I'm pretty sure Crouser was asked what he thought about it.
Now you may think right after she won it isn't the time to ask it, but this is the 1 time when athletes have to talk to the media and now for the first time ever it is 1. Flojo 2. Shericka on the all-time 200 list.
Jonathan's goal isn't to be chummy with the athletes. His goal isn't to be antagonistic either. But in the course of Worlds where he asks hundreds of questions to athletes, if a few don't like the question he asked or are uncomfortable answering, then I think he's doing his job. If Jon went a whole Worlds and never asked a question that he was uncomfortable himself asking, I'd argue he wasn't doing his job. "Tell us about your race" only gets us so far.
I disagree wejo. A question that (predictably) elicits a “that’s nothing to do with me” response is a useless question. There’s nothing gained by asking a question, at any time, that goes nowhere.
A journalist’s job isn’t merely to ask questions. Good journalists product good information. Jonathon’s “goal” should be a little higher than to make athletes uncomfortable. That’s petty and unproductive. A more productive approach to these conversations would likely yield far more engaging conversations and useful responses. All this one does is create drama on your forum. If that’s the goal, then have at it.
No one will sit down and talk to LRC while they flock to the Citius house for their live show. While they are not perfect, I am enjoying what Chavez and Merber are doing because it is a celebration of the sport and we really need that now. They even call themselves the “Today Show” of track. It’s fun and refreshing compared to the LRC daily show full of ludicrous hot takes from Rojo while Gault and Weldon try to talk him down.
I appreciate good journalism but LRC is just becoming horribly cynical while looking both old and tired. There is a way to get at truth but “gotcha” questions in the mixed zone is not the way. You guys look like jerks and further cement your poor reputation, especially with women athletes. Good luck getting an actual long form interview with anyone based on this nonsense. The athletes, their agents, and the power brokers of this sport know who you are.
Recently got mocked by Sha'Carri Richardson, scolded by Erriyon Knighton (being called "disrespectful" by an 18-year-old has to sting 😂), crossed the line with Werkuha Getachew and asked invasive, personal questions about Norah Jeruto's finances.
And yet these are still softball questions compared to what the media asks the most popular sports people
Wow. With so much going on at Worlds we have 5 pages on a thread started by someone with the screen name "Rojo the clown".
This thread is for the haters! (I'll put the link for you to sign up to the Supporters Club below).
It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. Asking a question does not imply the person who is #2 is dirty, it is implying person #1 is dirty.
When Randy Barnes had the shot put record, I'm pretty sure Crouser was asked what he thought about it.
Now you may think right after she won it isn't the time to ask it, but this is the 1 time when athletes have to talk to the media and now for the first time ever it is 1. Flojo 2. Shericka on the all-time 200 list.
Jonathan's goal isn't to be chummy with the athletes. His goal isn't to be antagonistic either. But in the course of Worlds where he asks hundreds of questions to athletes, if a few don't like the question he asked or are uncomfortable answering, then I think he's doing his job. If Jon went a whole Worlds and never asked a question that he was uncomfortable himself asking, I'd argue he wasn't doing his job. "Tell us about your race" only gets us so far.
I disagree wejo. A question that (predictably) elicits a “that’s nothing to do with me” response is a useless question. There’s nothing gained by asking a question, at any time, that goes nowhere.
A journalist’s job isn’t merely to ask questions. Good journalists product good information. Jonathon’s “goal” should be a little higher than to make athletes uncomfortable. That’s petty and unproductive. A more productive approach to these conversations would likely yield far more engaging conversations and useful responses. All this one does is create drama on your forum. If that’s the goal, then have at it.
Journalists often ask questions that the subject avoids or is made uncomfortable by. That, too, is information. There is no journalism if there is only "patsy" questions. That is pr. But that's what a lot of fans here would prefer.
How in the actual f is a usually good poster missing this most obvious point?
The conversation is as much about Gault as it is Jackson, arguably even more.
What Gault has said in the past about Houlihan has no relationship to his question to Jackson. He didn't accuse her of doping. His observation about Flojo's record is a commonplace.
He doesn't have to be right about all issues to be able to ask a valid question. No one does.
The concerns in this thread are of over-sensitive fans. The journalist is not the issue; it is always the athletes.
Horse poop. The discussion is largely about Gault. it’s right there in the title.
What Gault has said in the past about Houlihan has no relationship to his question to Jackson. He didn't accuse her of doping. His observation about Flojo's record is a commonplace.
He doesn't have to be right about all issues to be able to ask a valid question. No one does.
The concerns in this thread are of over-sensitive fans. The journalist is not the issue; it is always the athletes.
Horse poop. The discussion is largely about Gault. it’s right there in the title.
I mean, you can ask anyone arsey questions if you want to. But I note he’s not asking the British or Norwegian athletes, “you’re having a recent run of success on the track. Is that a national doping program like your cycling and skiing teams or have you just changed training methods?” People think that too, and at least that question would be about something actually related to them, not asking for comment on an athlete who died before they were born.
Jackson would know as much about Flojo as any of us. She never trained with her, didn’t run against her, isn’t from the US…it was purely a question to set her up, and try to get a headline out of her like “Sour grapes? Jamaican star accuses legend of doping.” Jackson put him in his place and the question ended up being entertaining because it backfired on Gault and he ended up looking foolish.
Jamaica is producing more top sprinters than any other nation and this from a population of less than 3 million people. One small US city. If you buy that you will buy anything.
unfortunately most people don't care. I stand by Gault for asking a question that is easy to answer, unless you are also cheating.
She can't answer the question without making a judgement or offering an opinion about if Flo Jo was clean/cheating (even though she never tested positive). It was a gimmick question to bait Jackson into saying something controversial. Whether or not you believe Flo Jo and or Jackson is clean/dirty is irrelevant. It was a cheap shot to ask Jackson to weigh in on Flo Jo right after the race.
I disagree wejo. A question that (predictably) elicits a “that’s nothing to do with me” response is a useless question. There’s nothing gained by asking a question, at any time, that goes nowhere.
A journalist’s job isn’t merely to ask questions. Good journalists product good information. Jonathon’s “goal” should be a little higher than to make athletes uncomfortable. That’s petty and unproductive. A more productive approach to these conversations would likely yield far more engaging conversations and useful responses. All this one does is create drama on your forum. If that’s the goal, then have at it.
Journalists often ask questions that the subject avoids or is made uncomfortable by. That, too, is information. There is no journalism if there is only "patsy" questions. That is pr. But that's what a lot of fans here would prefer.
Good journalism involves finding a way to get the person being interviewed to discuss something. This was a total fail, and predictably so given the approach of the interviewer. You and wejo can argue all day long that the “tough questions” illustrate being a good journalist, but the responses illustrate that the journalist has a lot to learn about people.
And this particular subject simply likely isn’t one that athletes at this level give a lot of thought to. Just because people chatter about it on forums all day long doesn’t mean it’s something that the very top athletes spend their time on; especially given the context here, being the record was set and ratified 10 years before Shericka was born, and FloJo’s been dead for so many years.
It’s about as relevant as asking Jakob if he feels Jake Wightman’s run is better than Roger Bannister’s sub-4.
I mean, you can ask anyone arsey questions if you want to. But I note he’s not asking the British or Norwegian athletes, “you’re having a recent run of success on the track. Is that a national doping program like your cycling and skiing teams or have you just changed training methods?” People think that too, and at least that question would be about something actually related to them, not asking for comment on an athlete who died before they were born.
Jackson would know as much about Flojo as any of us. She never trained with her, didn’t run against her, isn’t from the US…it was purely a question to set her up, and try to get a headline out of her like “Sour grapes? Jamaican star accuses legend of doping.” Jackson put him in his place and the question ended up being entertaining because it backfired on Gault and he ended up looking foolish.
Game, set and match. Precisely why this chat is very much so about J Gault.
Threads like this prove that doping denial continues to run very deep in a dirty sport.
Saying the questioning was inappropriate is not the same as denying doping in the sport.
He wasn’t going to get the answer you wanted. So that made the question rhetorical and useless and the athletes won’t even allow them to ask questions in the future if they are going to be a gossip column.
After this latest clown show by LetsRun I finally decided enough was enough and sent an email to the USATF national staff, to include the CEO (searchable on Google), imploring then to revoke LetsRun’s press credentials.
I cited links to their interviews, website, and Gault’a tweets.
Journalists must meet certain standards of quality and propriety. If they do not, there’s the door. It is more likely than not that our athletes are negatively affected by the behavior of the LetsRun staff, and therefore, LetsRun has the pay the piper, so to speak
I mean, you can ask anyone arsey questions if you want to. But I note he’s not asking the British or Norwegian athletes, “you’re having a recent run of success on the track. Is that a national doping program like your cycling and skiing teams or have you just changed training methods?” People think that too, and at least that question would be about something actually related to them, not asking for comment on an athlete who died before they were born.
Jackson would know as much about Flojo as any of us. She never trained with her, didn’t run against her, isn’t from the US…it was purely a question to set her up, and try to get a headline out of her like “Sour grapes? Jamaican star accuses legend of doping.” Jackson put him in his place and the question ended up being entertaining because it backfired on Gault and he ended up looking foolish.
I wonder why. Gault has disturbingly adopted the Broncos abhorrent views on race and women.
I mean, you can ask anyone arsey questions if you want to. But I note he’s not asking the British or Norwegian athletes, “you’re having a recent run of success on the track. Is that a national doping program like your cycling and skiing teams or have you just changed training methods?” People think that too, and at least that question would be about something actually related to them, not asking for comment on an athlete who died before they were born.
Jackson would know as much about Flojo as any of us. She never trained with her, didn’t run against her, isn’t from the US…it was purely a question to set her up, and try to get a headline out of her like “Sour grapes? Jamaican star accuses legend of doping.” Jackson put him in his place and the question ended up being entertaining because it backfired on Gault and he ended up looking foolish.
So everyone on Letsrun knows about Flojo and the doping arguments. But a 200m runner who is knocking on Flojo's world mark doesn't have a view on that? If she doesn't care whether the record is doped then she doesn't care about doping. We can form our own views as to why that would be.
After this latest clown show by LetsRun I finally decided enough was enough and sent an email to the USATF national staff, to include the CEO (searchable on Google), imploring then to revoke LetsRun’s press credentials.
I cited links to their interviews, website, and Gault’a tweets.
Journalists must meet certain standards of quality and propriety. If they do not, there’s the door. It is more likely than not that our athletes are negatively affected by the behavior of the LetsRun staff, and therefore, LetsRun has the pay the piper, so to speak
Just FYI, not harassment of any kind
The standards of journalism you refer to are not set by fans. Or by athletes. You can choose not to read what journalists write - but that's it.
Some of us don't agree with the views that you and your ilk express. That doesn't give us the right to silence you or those views - or you the right to silence ours.