Really Bad Joke
Did anyone else see this article on Inside Triathlon's website today?
The first half of it, written by Jeff Henderson, is spot-on - the discussion of how we can reduce the waste and pollution that are produced in even the smallest of local triathlons.
What I don't understand is why the editors had to effectively downplay such an important issue by turning it into some ridiculous debate. Editor Timothy Carlson wrote the second half of the article, which I guess is supposed to forecast what triathlon could be like in the later half of the century on a fully polluted planet, but honestly his tone and jeering reference to locals-only aid station volunteers with Priuses, and his reference to Calfee's bamboo bikes and their hefty price tags, really just make it seem like he hates environmentalists and that he doesn't want the sport to be inconvenienced. Somewhat appropriately, in his closing statement he reflects exactly what Henderson identifies as a major problem in individuals, the interest in short-term gratification, the here-and-now over the future, as well as a hopelessness that any individual effort can make a difference.
I'd write them a letter but I am a. too angry and b. too baffled by their intention.
What's wrong with a simple healthy discussion of how triathlon can be greener? Why can't we talk about Chris Lieto's Green Athlete campaign, wherein he is driving to [almost] all of his races in a van that is powered by 100% biodiesel? Why can't we talk about how Wildflower had both recycling and trash bins everywhere? Why can't we talk about how 5430 Sports is pursuing full sustainability and zero waste in their events? Wouldn't it be WAY more positive and productive to address real ways in which we can all work to protect the sport and the planet that we all love, than it was to basically make a joke out of green initiatives? Inside Triathlon and other magazines have the power to influence a lot of people. Give readers something positive, equip them with both reasons for and methods to help the environment and make their triathlon experience a sustainable one. Don't give them some big semi-sensationalistic argument for why the green effort is pointless and inconvenient. Even if it is meant as a joke, is it really the most effective way for the magazine to reach its readers about this subject?
I am curious to hear what others think. Maybe I completely misinterpreted the article, who knows.
The first half of it, written by Jeff Henderson, is spot-on - the discussion of how we can reduce the waste and pollution that are produced in even the smallest of local triathlons.
What I don't understand is why the editors had to effectively downplay such an important issue by turning it into some ridiculous debate. Editor Timothy Carlson wrote the second half of the article, which I guess is supposed to forecast what triathlon could be like in the later half of the century on a fully polluted planet, but honestly his tone and jeering reference to locals-only aid station volunteers with Priuses, and his reference to Calfee's bamboo bikes and their hefty price tags, really just make it seem like he hates environmentalists and that he doesn't want the sport to be inconvenienced. Somewhat appropriately, in his closing statement he reflects exactly what Henderson identifies as a major problem in individuals, the interest in short-term gratification, the here-and-now over the future, as well as a hopelessness that any individual effort can make a difference.
I'd write them a letter but I am a. too angry and b. too baffled by their intention.
What's wrong with a simple healthy discussion of how triathlon can be greener? Why can't we talk about Chris Lieto's Green Athlete campaign, wherein he is driving to [almost] all of his races in a van that is powered by 100% biodiesel? Why can't we talk about how Wildflower had both recycling and trash bins everywhere? Why can't we talk about how 5430 Sports is pursuing full sustainability and zero waste in their events? Wouldn't it be WAY more positive and productive to address real ways in which we can all work to protect the sport and the planet that we all love, than it was to basically make a joke out of green initiatives? Inside Triathlon and other magazines have the power to influence a lot of people. Give readers something positive, equip them with both reasons for and methods to help the environment and make their triathlon experience a sustainable one. Don't give them some big semi-sensationalistic argument for why the green effort is pointless and inconvenient. Even if it is meant as a joke, is it really the most effective way for the magazine to reach its readers about this subject?
I am curious to hear what others think. Maybe I completely misinterpreted the article, who knows.
Labels: 5430, chris lieto, enjoy the blog, environment, green athlete, in my opinion, insidetri.com
posted by Courtenay at 5/07/2008
4 Comments:
I just read the article, and had a similar reaction to yours.
It's an issue that warrants sincere discussion. Personally, I can't help but feel conflicted about how bike racing makes my life a little less green than it used to be. I have to use a car to get to races. Sure I use a Prius car-sharing program, but I didn't use a vehicle at all before I began racing! Training leaves me exhausted, and I'm often reduced to taking the bus or begging a ride off someone instead of bike commuting.
thanks. you helped me get up the nerve to write them about it.
one thing that bugged me about bike racing was the caravans! sooo many cars! but with road racing at high levels, is there really away around it? unless they perfect tubeless road tire technology, i can't think of one.
triathlon doesn't have much in the way of race-site car pollution, so that's nice. but there is a ton of waste that gets generated. i've started to see campaigns for recycling swim caps (generally you get a new one for each race and they aren't super nice so you throw them out), and used sneakers. the gel packets thing annoys me.
also ironman corp is starting this new policy where they let people register for NEXT YEAR's ironman at this year's edition of the event if they travel there to register IN PERSON. then they open online reg. the next day. so that's twice as much travel for one event! are you kidding me?!
isnt this like a regular feature, the two of them go on opposite sides of some question/issue? so i feel like the problem is this shouldnt have been one of those pro/con topics and also the guy on the other side isn't a good enough writer to get across what he's trying to do. i think he was forced to write the negative and tried to make it ridiculous so it became ironic/whatever. but it didnt work
Court,
Great points. I'm so glad you decided to write them because I was really going to encourage you. I haven't read the article yet but I'm sure I'm going to have the same reaction.
They should've never chosen that as a subject for smackdown. Why in the world would anybody see cons to making triathlons 'greener' in this era of being environmentally conscious and trying to do our best to make this planet more sustainable? How ridiculous indeed.
Anyway, I think you make great points. I hope that the article itself will generate a lot of discussion among readers and simply create more awareness. The rest is up to us to act on it.
It always bugged me, too, that they hand out new swim caps for every race. I end up saving all of them so I have this massive collection of swim caps at home that I feel bad tossing.
Anyway, good stuff. I'm going to go read the article and maybe write in, too. Hopefully if they get enough responses they'll write a real article about it without having to make a joke out of it.
Post a Comment
<< Home