Media Decoder: News Outlets Take to Washington for Inauguration Coverage

If he squints hard enough, President Obama will be able to see CNN from his perch on the inaugural podium on Monday.

The cable news channel has set up an elaborate studio on the National Mall — one of the four locations where its anchors will be leading coverage of Mr. Obama’s second inaugural celebration.

“The goal is to put our anchors in the middle of all the activity,” said Sam Feist, CNN’s Washington bureau chief. So in the morning, Wolf Blitzer will start out by the Capitol building and Anderson Cooper by the Mall, moving to new spots along the parade route in the afternoon. Other anchors will be at the inaugural balls at night.

The coverage might seem more subdued on other major television networks, reflecting the fact that there is generally less enthusiasm for presidential inaugurations the second time around. Still, the ceremony and the spectacle that accompanies it will take over the networks and news channels beginning with their morning shows, some of which are relocating to Washington for the day.

CBS has built a studio on the Mall beside CNN’s. Its one-year-old morning show, “CBS This Morning,” will be broadcast from there and expand to three hours for the day. NBC’s “Today” show will have all of its hosts in Washington, as well.

ABC’s “Good Morning America” is doing it a bit differently, sending George Stephanopoulos and Josh Elliott to Washington and having the show’s other hosts stay in New York.

The bulk of the festivities will be anchored by the same correspondents who handled election night for their networks. There has been a last-minute change at PBS, though: Judy Woodruff is away from Washington because of a family illness, a spokeswoman said, so the senior correspondent Jeffrey Brown will anchor with Gwen Ifill, instead.

Most Americans will watch the inauguration on television, just as they did in 2009, the first time Mr. Obama was inaugurated. But there will also be a panoply of Web sites live-streaming the event, including that of the Presidential Inauguration Committee.

Read More..

Some give up their guns as others rally against tighter laws









DALLAS — On one side of Young Street, volunteers from First Presbyterian Church of Dallas attempted to persuade gun owners to turn in their firearms. They would receive $50 to $200 — from donors — and know that their guns would be destroyed.


Across the downtown street, members of the Right Group — formed to compete with the church event — set up in a rented vacant lot to urge visitors to resell their firearms rather than destroy them. They had signs reading "We pay more" and "Gun rescue."


The dueling buybacks came on a day when thousands attended peaceful Guns Across America rallies at state capitals nationwide to oppose tighter gun laws. Separately, a Republican consulting firm had promoted Saturday as Gun Appreciation Day, three days after President Obama laid out a slew of proposals designed to restrict gun access in the wake of last month's Newtown, Conn., school shooting.





Among the hundreds who gathered in Sacramento in front of the Capitol was Christina Marotti, 33, of East Sacramento, who brought her daughters, ages 2 and 4. One had a sign saying, "My mom [hearts] guns." The other's said, "Arm my teacher."


"Wherever you take away the right to have guns, the crime rate increases," Marotti said. "As a mother, that scares me."


Some customers at the bustling Los Angeles Gun Club, a popular downtown shooting range, were unaware of the Gun Appreciation Day campaign.


"Yay for the 2nd Amendment, especially in the times we're in now," said Jonathan Wright, who was celebrating his upcoming 24th birthday with a group of friends.


Alex Katz, 25, who said he visited ranges a couple of times a month and described himself as pro-gun control, found the "appreciation day" concept "a little tasteless right now."


In Dallas, the church made the first buyback purchase: $50 for an old pistol from a pair of local women.


Scott Mankoff, 43, of Dallas waded through the rival group's crowd of about 100 — then headed to the church.


Mankoff, a retired artist, opposes new gun laws but came to turn in a spare .22 rifle to be destroyed because of the Newtown shootings.


"It's not about the money — it's about getting it off the street," he said.


For others, it was more about the money.


They showed up to sell .22 rifles, .40- and .45-caliber handguns, a Ruger M-77 rifle, a Chinese SKS rifle, some for $400. One 19-year-old showed up trying to sell his customized AR-15, worth about $1,000, knowing gun prices spiked after the Newtown shootings.


James Brown, 41, of Dallas initially went to the church buyback but got tired of waiting in the long line with his 13-year-old son.


When they crossed the street, they were applauded and led to the back of a pickup truck, where Brown's Rossi Ranch Hand .45 was auctioned for $300 and his .25 handgun for $200.


"I prefer to keep it in the family. If it's a good gun, and people can use it, why not sell it?" he said.


Brown said he didn't blame guns for the tragedy at Newtown.


"A gun can be your best friend. You get thugs on the street and you can protect your family," he said.


The church, a long-established landmark with a congregation of 1,600 that includes the mayor, has staged buybacks in the past, but it had never faced a counter-buyback. Some organizers were irritated to see people drawn to the other lot. The pastor's wife, Carol Adams, started toting a sign of her own and alerting police when she thought those across the street were becoming too aggressive.





Read More..

A Google-a-Day Puzzle for Jan. 20











Our good friends at Google run a daily puzzle challenge and asked us to help get them out to the geeky masses. Each day’s puzzle will task your googling skills a little more, leading you to Google mastery. Each morning at 12:01 a.m. Eastern time you’ll see a new puzzle posted here.


SPOILER WARNING:
We leave the comments on so people can work together to find the answer. As such, if you want to figure it out all by yourself, DON’T READ THE COMMENTS!


Also, with the knowledge that because others may publish their answers before you do, if you want to be able to search for information without accidentally seeing the answer somewhere, you can use the Google-a-Day site’s search tool, which will automatically filter out published answers, to give you a spoiler-free experience.


And now, without further ado, we give you…


TODAY’S PUZZLE:



Note: Ad-blocking software may prevent display of the puzzle widget.




Ken is a husband and father from the San Francisco Bay Area, where he works as a civil engineer. He also wrote the NYT bestselling book "Geek Dad: Awesomely Geeky Projects for Dads and Kids to Share."

Read more by Ken Denmead

Follow @fitzwillie and @geekdads on Twitter.



Read More..

“Beasts of Southern Wild,” “Les Miz” among Costume Designer Award nominees






LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) – Films as diverse as “Beast of the Southern Wild” and “Les Miserables” were among the nominees for the 15th annual Costume Designers Guild Awards announced Thursday by the organization.


Stephani Lewis was nominated for “Beasts” in the contemporary film category, along with Louise Stjernsward for “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel,” Mark Bridges for “Silver Linings Playbook,” Jany Temime for “Skyfall” and George L. Little for “Zero Dark Thirty.”






Paco Delgado was nominated in the period film group, along with Jacqueline West for “Argo,” Jacqueline Durran for “Anna Karenina,” Joanna Johnston for “Lincoln” and Kasia Walicka-Maimone for “Moonrise Kingdom.”


The winners of the seven competitive awards will be announced at a gala on Tuesday, February 19, at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.


A special Lacoste Spotlight Award will be presented to Anne Hathaway. Producer, writer, comedian and creator of “Saturday Night Live” Lorne Michaels will receive the Distinguished Collaborator Award. Honorary Career Achievement Awards will be presented to costume designers Judianna Makovsky and Eduardo Castro for their outstanding work in film and television.


The other nominees:


Fantasy Film


“Cloud Atlas,” Kym Barret, Pierre-Yves Gayraud;


“The Hunger Games,” Judianna Makovsky;


“Mirror Mirror,” Eiko Ishioka;


“Snow White and the Huntsman,” Colleen Atwood


Contemporary TV Series


“Girls,” Jennifer Rogien;


“Nashville,” Susie DeSanto;


“Revenge,” Jill Ohanneson;


“Smash,” Molly Maginnis;


“Treme,” Alonzo Wilson, Ann Walters


Period/fantasy TV Series


“Boardwalk Empire,” John Dunn, Lisa Padovani;


“Downton Abbey,” Caroline McCall;


“Game of Thrones,” Michele Clapton;


Made for TV Movie or Mini Series


“American Horror Story: Asylum, Season 2,” Lou Eyrich;


“Hatfields & McCoys,” Karri Hutchinson;


“Hemingway & Gellhorn,” Ruth Myers


Commercials


Capital One: Couture, Roseanne Fiedler;


Captain Morgan Black, Judianna Makovsky;


Dos Equis: Most Interesting Man in the World, Julie Vogel


Movies News Headlines – Yahoo! News




Read More..

Hollywood Makes Its Case for ‘Zero Dark Thirty’


LOS ANGELES — Hollywood is pushing back, at least a little, against the Washington power players and others who have put the squeeze on “Zero Dark Thirty.”


In the last week, Mark Boal, who is a producer of the film and wrote the screenplay, hired Jeffrey H. Smith, a prominent lawyer who specializes in domestic security and First Amendment issues, Mr. Smith confirmed on Friday. His mission is to represent Mr. Boal with regard to any approach from Congress or the executive branch in connection with their inquiries into the film’s depiction of torture in the hunt for Osama bin Laden.


Meanwhile, Christopher J. Dodd, the president of the Motion Picture Association of America, raised a warning on Friday for those who are calling for investigations into the film.


“There could, in my view, be a chilling effect if, in the end of all this, you have a screenwriter or a director called before an investigating committee,” Mr. Dodd said. He stressed that he was speaking for himself rather than for the association’s member studios, including Sony Pictures, which released “Zero Dark Thirty.”


Mr. Dodd, who served five terms in the Senate before retiring in 2010, said he could not recall another movie being so heavily scrutinized by the government. He expressed concern that the military or other government agencies that have routinely helped filmmakers might withhold future cooperation rather than risk similar pressure.


“ ‘JFK’ and ‘All the President’s Men’ were controversial,” Mr. Dodd said, noting that neither of those films seemed to draw the same level of attention from lawmakers.


Three senators — Dianne Feinstein of California, Carl Levin of Michigan and John McCain of Arizona — have publicly criticized “Zero Dark Thirty” because they believe it sent a message that torture was an effective tool in the hunt for Bin Laden. In a Dec. 19 letter to Michael Lynton, the chairman and chief executive of Sony Pictures, they asked the studio to act to change that impression, without specifying what they expected it to do. (The film had a limited theatrical run late last month, and was released more broadly on Jan. 11.)


In two letters sent in December to Michael Morell, the acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the senators, citing their affiliation with the Select Committee on Intelligence, asked that the agency provide information and documents about its contact with the filmmakers.


On Friday, Mr. Dodd said he initially screened “Zero Dark Thirty” at the Motion Picture Association’s Washington headquarters for Ms. Feinstein, whom he described as a close friend. “She had problems with it,” he said.


Ms. Feinstein’s objections have centered on what she has said is a portrayal of the efficacy of torture that is at odds with accounts that have been provided to Congress in the past by intelligence operatives.


In the meantime, Mr. Smith, a former general counsel of the C.I.A. who has represented Henry Kissinger, Robert McNamara and other former government officials in security-related matters, confirmed in an e-mail that he represents Mr. Boal.


The government inquiries “raise serious questions about the nature of the cooperation between the government and those who seek to make films about sensitive and important issues,” Mr. Smith said in a brief statement.


To date, he said, Mr. Boal has not been contacted in connection with the inquiries.


Last week Kathryn Bigelow, the film’s director, made her strongest public statement to date about the torture controversy.


“Those of us who work in the arts know that depiction is not endorsement,” she said in a statement published in The Los Angeles Times. “If it was, no artists would be able to paint inhumane practices, no author could write about them and no filmmaker could delve into the thorny subjects of our time.”


Torture, she added, “is a part of the story we could not ignore.”


The criticism of “Zero Dark Thirty” has extended beyond Washington and included members of the film industry. Last weekend, as Hollywood gathered for the Golden Globe Awards, the actors David Clennon, Edward Asner and Martin Sheen — all members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences — were organizing a public condemnation of the film for what they have called its “tolerance” of torture.


That push prompted a public response by Amy Pascal, the co-chairwoman of Sony Pictures, who called it “reprehensible.” Jessica Chastain, the film’s star, was honored as the year’s best dramatic actress at the Golden Globes, and the movie has received five Oscar nominations from the academy, including one for best picture. Ms. Bigelow was not nominated for a directing Oscar, leading to speculation that the torture controversy had worked against her selection.


After the Golden Globes, Mr. Boal flew to Europe to promote “Zero Dark Thirty” as it opened in Britain and France.


In a series of e-mails, Mr. Boal said he found the reception to the movie there to be “much smoother” than in the United States.


European interviewers appeared to regard the torture controversy more as a reckoning among Americans than as something that directly involved them, he said.


And in France, he said, a number of interviewers compared the film’s airing of the torture issue “favorably to France’s allergy to and even censorship of” movies about its role in Algeria’s war for independence.


“We might bicker,” Mr. Boal said, “but at least we face the past in my country. Sorta.”


This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 20, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the title of Michael Lynton at Sony Pictures. He is the chairman and chief executive, not the co-chairman.



Read More..

A backyard nuclear shelter? Yes, paranoia does sell








One sterling quality of American businesses is that they'll try to make money from anything.


Paranoia, for instance. So say hello to Ron Hubbard, the owner of Montebello-based Atlas Survival Shelters, which converts huge corrugated metal tubes up to 50 feet long into fully equipped, all-the-comforts-of-home underground shelters at a price of up to about $78,000 each, not including shipping and interment.


You may have spotted the Atlas shop from the 5 Freeway as you're heading into downtown. There's a corrugated tube out front, painted bright yellow and looking like a tipped-over corn silo. High on the exterior wall facing the road is a banner declaring that the shelters offer protection from nuclear blasts, nuclear fallout, EMP (that's electromagnetic pulses, which can foul electrical systems), solar flares, mobs, looters, earthquakes and chemical warfare. If there's anything left off that list, it's probably not worth worrying about.






"People who buy my shelters are not radical crazy people," Hubbard told me recently as he guided me around the Montebello shop. "I get maybe three crazy calls a year. They're practical people."


Hubbard, 50, is a big Texan with a toothy grin and the friendly enthusiasm of someone trying to sell you something. He'll expound cheerily on the basic practicality, not to mention the sheer joy, of having a 40-foot corrugated steel drum buried 20 feet deep in your yard and tricking it out with a big-screen TV and Internet connection for those long days and nights hunkered down against nuclear blasts, the Chinese army or domestic looters. His shelters also offer such necessities as microwave ovens, space for a year's worth of provisions and high-grade air filtration.


"We don't know where our country will go," he said. "If we're going to be attacked, my shelters will protect you from Sarin gas or super flu. If we go bankrupt and we don't pay China, that could be the start of World War III. We could attack Iran or back Israel, and that could start a war. This is insurance. Why do we carry insurance on our homes? Just. In. Case."


Hubbard doesn't describe these dystopias as though he actually believes in them, but rather with the air of a salesman trying out any buzzword that might trigger a deal. During the couple of hours we were together, he described his products serially as underground condos, second homes, combination second homes and bomb shelters, man caves, man caves that happen to be bombproof, weekend cabins and hunting cabins.


Atlas Survival Shelters hasn't turned a significant profit yet. Hubbard said it made no money in the start-up year of 2011, was modestly in the black last year and may show a profit for 2013. But the business is unusual enough that it has won featured spots on several reality shows. An episode on A&E Network's "Shipping Wars" shows a team of moving experts trying to figure out how to transport a 32-foot shelter on their flatbed truck. During the episode Hubbard regales them with the virtues of the unit's escape-hatch feature, a second portal that opens only from the inside, in case of an attack.


"Somebody sees you going down; while they're trying to smoke you out, you're going to the back tunnel, you're gonna come up through an escape hatch that's hidden underground, you can shoot 'em in the back. Pretty cool, huh?" (Remarked one of the show's plainly creeped-out female cast members, "Remind me to never pay him a visit.")


More recently, Atlas was featured on an episode of the National Geographic Channel series "Doomsday Preppers," which chronicles the lifestyles of the scared and nervous. Hubbard's customer is described in network publicity as Brian Smith, a father of 12 "preparing for a total collapse of the U.S. monetary system."


Hubbard got into the underground shelter business a little more than a year ago after years of selling wrought-iron doors from the same location, operating as Hubbard Iron Doors. That business was brought low by the poor economy and cheap Chinese knockoffs, Hubbard says. It filed for bankruptcy in 2011; Hubbard says it's now owned and run by his brother, though the two companies share space with each other.


While he was casting about for a new business, Hubbard said, he happened across a brochure for Radius Engineering International, a Texas company that manufacturers fiberglass shelters mostly for business, government and military buyers. But the Radius products were expensive — they run from $150,000 up to millions, depending on the design and capacity. Hubbard thought he could do better on price while turning out a more appealing hideaway.


He's still trying to get a feel for the market, however. With his six or seven full-time workers, he can turn out one shelter a week. Orders, he said, come in at somewhere between one a month and one a week, more in periods of publicity-driven paranoia — during the run-up to the supposed Mayan apocalypse at the end of December, he said, calls jumped up to one a day.


The joke was on the callers, however, because Hubbard's six-week lead time meant that no one who called because they had just seen a Mayan feature on TV could get a shelter built, much less on site and in the ground, in time to beat the end of the world. Luckily, the apocalypse was a bust.


And for all that he plays up Armageddon in all its possible varieties in his sales pitch, doomsday may not be that great a marketing tool. "If I just sold bomb shelters, there would be about this big of a market." Hubbard holds his thumb and forefinger a half-inch apart. "But if I say, 'man cave,' 'wine cellar,' 'getaway,' then I get the recreational shelter owner too."


He says most of his calls come from retired military men, doctors, lawyers and business owners — possibly because the latter are among the few categories of buyers with the wherewithal to plunk down $60,000 or $70,000 for a man cave/bomb shelter, plus installation.


The size of the overall shelter market is unclear, in part because its promoters make a point of secrecy about whom they sell to and where. Privately held Radius has claimed to sell more than $30 million worth of shelters a year, but you have to take their word for it.


Then there are firms like Vivos Group, a Del Mar, Calif., company that claims to have started survivalist communities in three states — but they appear to be sort of co-op arrangements in which you have to apply to be considered for "co-ownership" of your refuge community. Once you're chosen, they'll let you know where to go when the end times come.


"This is just the threshold of something that's going to become common," Hubbard said, putting a hopeful spin on his words as though aware that paranoia may be peaking today, but gone tomorrow. "So I say, don't buy a bomb shelter. Buy an underground cabin, and enjoy it."


Michael Hiltzik's column appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Reach him at mhiltzik@latimes.com, read past columns at latimes.com/hiltzik, check out facebook.com/hiltzik and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.






Read More..

A Google-a-Day Puzzle for Jan. 19











Our good friends at Google run a daily puzzle challenge and asked us to help get them out to the geeky masses. Each day’s puzzle will task your googling skills a little more, leading you to Google mastery. Each morning at 12:01 a.m. Eastern time you’ll see a new puzzle posted here.


SPOILER WARNING:
We leave the comments on so people can work together to find the answer. As such, if you want to figure it out all by yourself, DON’T READ THE COMMENTS!


Also, with the knowledge that because others may publish their answers before you do, if you want to be able to search for information without accidentally seeing the answer somewhere, you can use the Google-a-Day site’s search tool, which will automatically filter out published answers, to give you a spoiler-free experience.


And now, without further ado, we give you…


TODAY’S PUZZLE:



Note: Ad-blocking software may prevent display of the puzzle widget.




Ken is a husband and father from the San Francisco Bay Area, where he works as a civil engineer. He also wrote the NYT bestselling book "Geek Dad: Awesomely Geeky Projects for Dads and Kids to Share."

Read more by Ken Denmead

Follow @fitzwillie and @geekdads on Twitter.



Read More..

J.J. Abrams to produce Lance Armstrong biopic






LOS ANGELES (AP) — He’s already gotten the Oprah treatment. Now Lance Armstrong is headed for the silver screen.


Paramount Pictures and J.J. Abramsproduction company, Bad Robot, are planning a biopic about the disgraced cyclist, a studio spokeswoman said Friday.






They’ve secured the rights to New York Times reporter Juliet Macur‘s upcoming book “Cycle of Lies: The Fall of Lance Armstrong,” due out in June. Macur covered the seven-time Tour de France winner for over a decade.


No director, writer, star or start date have been set.


Armstrong is in the midst of a two-part interview with Oprah Winfrey in which he admits to using performance-enhancing drugs to reach his historic victories, something he’d defiantly denied for years. The International Olympic Committee stripped him of his 2000 bronze medal this week.


Entertainment News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: J.J. Abrams to produce Lance Armstrong biopic
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/j-j-abrams-to-produce-lance-armstrong-biopic/
Link To Post : J.J. Abrams to produce Lance Armstrong biopic
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

Business Briefing | Medicine: F.D.A. Clears Botox to Help Bladder Control



Botox, the wrinkle treatment made by Allergan, has been approved to treat adults with overactive bladders who cannot tolerate or were not helped by other drugs, the Food and Drug Administration said on Friday. Botox injected into the bladder muscle causes the bladder to relax, increasing its storage capacity. “Clinical studies have demonstrated Botox’s ability to significantly reduce the frequency of urinary incontinence,” Dr. Hylton V. Joffe, director of the F.D.A.’s reproductive and urologic products division, said in a statement. “Today’s approval provides an important additional treatment option for patients with overactive bladder, a condition that affects an estimated 33 million men and women in the United States.”


Read More..

Analysis: Amid Tears Lance Armstrong Leaves Unanswered Questions in Oprah Winfrey Interview





In an extensive interview with Oprah Winfrey that was shown over two nights, Lance Armstrong admitted publicly for the first time that he doped throughout his cycling career. He revealed that all seven of his Tour de France victories were fueled by doping, that he never felt bad about cheating, and that he had covered up a positive drug test at the 1999 Tour with a backdated doctor’s prescription for banned cortisone.




Armstrong, the once defiant cyclist, also became choked up when he discussed how he told his oldest child that the rumors about Armstrong’s doping were true.


Even with all that, the interview will most likely be remembered for what it was missing.


Armstrong had not subjected himself to questioning from anyone in the news media since United States antidoping officials laid out their case against him in October. He chose not to appeal their ruling, leaving him with a lifetime ban from Olympic sports.


He personally chose Winfrey for his big reveal, and it went predictably. Winfrey allowed him to share his thoughts and elicited emotions from him, but she consistently failed to ask critical follow-up questions that would have addressed the most vexing aspects of Armstrong’s deception.


She did not press him on who helped him dope or cover up his drug use for more than a decade. Nor did she ask him why he chose to take banned performance-enhancing substances even after cancer had threatened his life.


Winfrey also did not push him to answer whether he had admitted to doctors in an Indianapolis hospital in 1996 that he had used performance-enhancing drugs, a confession a former teammate and his wife claimed they overheard that day. To get to the bottom of his deceit, antidoping officials said, Armstrong has to be willing to provide more details.


“He spoke to a talk-show host,” David Howman, the director general of the World Anti-Doping Agency, said from Montreal on Friday. “I don’t think any of it amounted to assistance to the antidoping community, let alone substantial assistance. You bundle it all up and say, ‘So what?’


Jeffrey M. Tillotson, the lawyer for an insurance company that unsuccessfully withheld a $5 million bonus from Armstrong on the basis that he had cheated to win the Tour de France in 2004, said his client would make a decision over the weekend about whether to sue Armstrong. If it proceeds, the company, SCA Promotions, will seek $12 million, the total it paid Armstrong in bonuses and legal fees.


“It seemed to us that he was more sorry that he had been caught than for what he had done,” Tillotson said. “If he’s serious about rehabbing himself, he needs to start making amends to the people he bullied and vilified, and he needs to start paying money back.”


Armstrong, who said he once believed himself to be invincible, explained in the portion of the interview broadcast Friday night that he started to take steps toward redemption last month. Then, after dozens of questions had already been lobbed his way, he became emotional when he described how he told his 13-year-old son, Luke, that yes, his father had cheated by doping. That talk happened last month over the holidays, Armstrong said as he fought back tears.


“I said, listen, there’s been a lot of questions about your dad, my career, whether I doped or did not dope, and I’ve always denied, I’ve always been ruthless and defiant about that, which is probably why you trusted me, which makes it even sicker,” Armstrong said he told his son, the oldest of his five children. “I want you to know it’s true.”


At times, Winfrey’s interview seemed more like a therapy session than an inquisition, with Armstrong admitting that he was narcissistic and had been in therapy — and that he should be in therapy regularly because his life was so complicated.


In the end, the interview most likely accomplished what Armstrong had hoped: it was the vehicle through which he admitted to the public that he had cheated by doping, which he had lied about for more than a decade. But his answers were just the first step to clawing back his once stellar reputation.


On Friday, Armstrong appeared more contrite than he had during the part of the interview that was shown Thursday, yet he still insisted that he was clean when he made his comeback to cycling in 2009 after a brief retirement, an assertion the United States Anti-Doping Agency said was untrue. He also implied that his lifetime ban from all Olympic sports was unfair because some of his former teammates who testified about their doping and the doping on Armstrong’s teams received only six-month bans.


Richard Pound, the founding chairman of WADA and a member of the International Olympic Committee, said he was unmoved by Armstrong’s televised mea culpa.


“If what he’s looking for is some kind of reconstruction of his image, instead of providing entertainment with Oprah Winfrey, he’s got a long way to go,” Pound said Friday from his Montreal office.


Armstrong acknowledged to Winfrey during Friday’s broadcast that he has a long way to go before winning back the public’s trust. He said he understood why people recently turned on him because they felt angry and betrayed.


“I lied to you and I’m sorry,” he said before acknowledging that he might have lost many of his supporters for good. “I am committed to spending as long as I have to to make amends, knowing full well that I won’t get very many back.”


Armstrong also said that the scandal has cost him $75 million in lost sponsors, all of whom abandoned him last fall after Usada made public 1,000 pages of evidence that Armstrong had doped.


“In a way, I just assumed we would get to that point,” he said of his sponsors’ leaving. “The story was getting out of control.”


In closing her interview, Winfrey asked Armstrong a question that left him perplexed.


“Will you rise again?” she said.


Armstrong said: “I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know what’s out there.”


Then, as the interview drew to a close, Armstrong said: “The ultimate crime is the betrayal of these people that supported me and believed in me.”


Read More..