There is murder and mayhem afoot in Norway. Well, ok, no murders as such as yet, and, erm, no mayhem either, but great commotion, anyway. It’s all about sports, so I really shouldn’t be interested, except it’s not only about sports it’s also about journalistic integrity (or lack thereof).
The main commercial channel in Norway, TV2, has a documentary series called “Rikets tilstand” (State of the Nation), which deals with suspect goings-on in our oh-so-perfect-at-least-on-the-facade country. All well and good, and laudable in it’s principles. Except in this case they seem to have been rather more interested in a good story than in the strict truth. The theme of last week’s show was Norwegian cross country skiing, and, more specifically, were the exceptionally impressive results around the ’94 Olympics in Lillehammer for real, or were our homegrown heroes somewhat less than clean as snow. Based on hearsay and a list of medications that, reportedly, were ordered by the attending doctor the producers hinted, rather heavily, that this indicated that the atlethes had been using illegal drugs to enchance their performance. Outrage ensued, of course. Tearing people down from pedestals is a thankless job. Well, as it happens, the outrage seems to have been justified. The most tangible “evidence” the producers had aquired was this list of 150 items, 9 of which were banned at the time (and the others including such odd choices as hemmoroid treatment). Firstly, there was no evidence that this medication was actually used, all the producers thought they had was the list of items the team doctors wanted to have in their emergency kit. Hardly damning evidence, but suggestive, and journalists can make a lot of hullaballoo from suggestive facts. But it turns out that the “facts” aren’t facts after all. The list is the supplier’s list of items they can supply. The list of items actually supplied contains only 20 items. The producers have worked on this case for a year, and not once has it occurred to any of them to contact the suppliers to verify their evidence. Another bit of half-proof was that several litres of blood-plasma had apparently gone missing. Injecting the stuff can enchance your performance in the field. It is now illegal. In ’94, however, it wasn’t. Still, it’s a slur. According to the hospital who supplied the stuff, though, all of it was accounted for. What was not used at Lillehammer’s many emergency stations (with crowds like that you get the odd accident) was returned.
All in all, the producers have come out of this rather badly, and have had to apologise. The damage is done, however. We all know that the dynamics of journalism dictate that the disclosure gets the front page. In Norway, the disclaimer and apology also made headline news, in countries like Finland, though, where they have recently been addled with similar accusations (and rather more tangible proof), the journalists are happy to rub their hands in glee over the downfall of the Norwegian saints. Both the individual athletes and the Norwegian skiing association are now considering sueing TV2 for dammages. TV2, of course, do not think that there is any likelihood of loss of income in the case, but with athletes being dependent on sponsors and with people like Bjørn Dæhlie making his living by, amongst other things, selling sporting apparel, I think TV2 are being naive (or they’re just trying to get away with it…).
The funny thing is that one of TV2’s most successful shows in later years has been “Gutta på tur” (The boys’ outing), a combined travel, nature and food programme, starring, amongst others, the two main cross country skiers from “the Lillehammer era”, Bjørn Dæhlie and Vegar Ullvang. The two are now saying they would rather not appear in any more shows. The two other hosts, a presenter and a chef, being friends of the two skiers are not very enthusiastic either. I wonder whether the TV2 board will elect to express surprise at this?
On the whole, it’s perfectly possible that the athletes were using illegal drugs. It is also perfectly possible that they were not. Innocent until proven guilty. If you are going to accuse someone of cheating, you need to have proof. If you don’t, the accused, if he is a gentleman, may challenge you to a duel, so you had better brush up on your gun skills. I suggest that if any duelling is to be done, the athletes chose a champion to represent them rather than all go in individually. May I suggest one of the winners in the biathlon race?
Voice in my head: Lillebjørn Nilsen – Stilleste gutt på sovesal 1