Livestrong Day: does Lance Armstrong's doping conviction matter?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/02/livestrong-day-lance-armstrong

Version 0 of 1.

Tuesday is Livestrong Day, the cancer charity founded by former professional cyclist and cancer survivor Lance Armstrong. We always used to say "seven-time winner of the Tour de France Lance Armstrong", but that description has been rendered untrue by the fact that, in August, the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) stripped Armstrong of his Tour victories after he declined to defend USADA's case against him for systematic cheating by doping throughout that period of his career. His statement at the time was carefully constructed to cast doubt on USADA's process and cast himself as the injured victim, but in the eyes of most people he is, by default of his own choice, a convicted dope cheat.

By avoiding a public airing of the evidence against him, however, Armstrong did leave himself a chink of credibility with his cycling career's remaining legacy, the Livestrong Foundation. "This October," he reminded us, "my Foundation will celebrate 15 years of service to cancer survivors and the milestone of raising nearly $500m." The Livestrong Foundation itself has not updated its website and is still citing Armstrong's seven Tour "victories" as part of its inspiring message to people with cancer and cancer survivors. Even when Armstrong's friend, Senator John McCain, declined to intervene on his behalf and backed USADA's investigation, the Livestrong Foundation came out in support of Armstrong, criticising USADA's "biased process".

The Livestrong Foundation may judge, perhaps correctly, that for the majority of the American public Armstrong's brand is still untarnished – and that only among cycling's relatively small fanbase is he a condemned man. The Livestrong Foundation may also assume, perhaps rightly, that its own brand is now independent of its progenitor's and effectively immune from whatever taint is there. It is a huge operation, undoubtedly does good work (with a notably high proportion of funds raised going in to actual programs, rather than admin and marketing), and most people who get involved probably have only a hazy, if any, idea of what Lance Armstrong and the recent controversy have to do with their cancer survivor work.

<strong>So what do you think? Is it long live Livestrong on 2 October? Or does something not smell right about a cancer charity founded on the "inspirational story" of a dope cheat? Would you get involved in a Livestrong event or fundraising, or pause for thought? Share your thoughts in the comments below.</strong>