Tennis: Federer ends Tomic campaign






MELBOURNE: Roger Federer fought off an aggressive challenge from rising Australian star Bernard Tomic to reach the fourth round at the Australian Open on Saturday.

The 17-time Grand Slam king was stretched at times in a compelling match before coming out on top 6-4, 7-6 (7/5), 6-1 in one hour 58 minutes on Rod Laver Arena.

Federer, who is chasing his fifth Australian crown, will now face big-serving Canadian 13th seed Milos Raonic in the round of 16 on Monday.

The 31-year-old Swiss great became the first man to win 250 Grand Slam matches in his victory over the 43rd-ranked Tomic and he reached the fourth round in Melbourne for the 12th straight year.

It was a much-improved performance from 20-year-old Tomic, who lost to Federer 6-2, 6-2, 6-4 in the fourth round at last year's Australian Open.

The last time Federer lost in the third round at a Grand Slam was nine years ago, at the 2004 French Open to Brazilian Gustavo Kuerten.

"Overall we both played a great match, Bernard has had a great run and he really got the best out of me tonight, so I hope he can keep it up, I really wish him the best," Federer said.

"You've got to expect the unexpected and Bernard's got the tools to do that. The court was playing a tough faster when we played last year so it allows him to play a bit more aggressive and he's a big guy with a powerful serve."

Federer got off to a flyer breaking Tomic's opening service game to put the pressure squarely on the Australian youngster before a raucous full house at the centre court.

But Tomic dug in and held his serve, even fighting off three set points in the ninth game, before the Swiss legend claimed the opening set on his fourth set point, drilling his serve to the Australian's backhand.

Tomic came more into the contest during a compelling high-quality second set as he began pushing Federer around the court in thrilling rallies.

The Australian fought off three break points in the ninth game and another one in his next service game as the set went to a tiebreaker.

Tomic led 4-1 after an early mini-break before Federer fought back, winning a thrilling 29-stroke rally and then finding the line with a forehand.

Federer clinched a crucial two-sets-to-love lead winning it on his first set point.

The world number two produced a fantastic chase down to win another furious rally and break Tomic's service in the second game of the third set.

Federer began to pull away with another service break to take command of the high-class match but Tomic showed in defeat that he could press for higher honours in the future.

- AFP/fa



Read More..

Manti Te'o: 'I wasn't faking it'






STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • Manti Te'o talks to ESPN about his alleged girlfriend hoax

  • "I wasn't faking it," he says in an off -camera interview

  • Te'o rose to national prominence by leading the Fighting Irish to an undefeated regular season




What are your thoughts? Share with us on iReport.


(CNN) -- Manti Te'o -- one of the best defenders this season in college football -- defended himself in an ESPN interview Friday night, saying there was no way he was part of a hoax involving a deceased girlfriend.


"I wasn't faking it," he told ESPN's Jeremy Schaap in an off -camera interview highlighted on the network. "I wasn't part of this."









Notre Dame star Manti Te'o















HIDE CAPTION





<<


<





1




2




3




4




5




6




7




8




9




10




11




12




13




14



>


>>














For the past few days, the former Notre Dame linebacker has been the subject of ridicule after reports surfaced that the girlfriend he'd gushed about and said died this fall of leukemia never existed.


Te'o rose to national prominence by leading the Fighting Irish to an undefeated regular season, amassing double-digit tackle games and becoming the face of one of the best defenses in the nation.


As he and his team excelled, Te'o told interviewers in September and October that his grandmother and girlfriend -- whom he described as a 22-year-old Stanford University student -- had died within hours of each other.


The twin losses inspired him to honor them with sterling play on the field, Te'o said. He led his team to a 20-3 routing of Michigan State after he heard the news.


"I miss 'em, but I know that I'll see them again one day," he told ESPN.


He was second in the Heisman race and led his team to the championship game, losing to Alabama.


The fairy tale story ended on Wednesday when sports website Deadspin published a piece dismissing as a hoax the existence of Te'o's girlfriend and suggesting he was complicit.


Te'o released a statement on Wednesday saying he was a victim of a hoax but Friday night was the first time he publicly addressed the issue.


"When (people) hear the facts, they'll know," Te'o told ESPN. "They'll know that there is no way that I could be part of this."


After a two-and-a-half hour interview, veteran sports reporter Schaap said Te'o's story sounded convincing.


"He made a very convincing witness to his defense," Schapp said on ESPN. "He answered all my questions pretty convincingly. If he is making up his side of the story, he is a very convincing actor."


The twisted tale of the Heisman Trophy runner-up and the mystery woman named Lennay Kekua has left many with questions.


Te'o sought to answer many of them Friday night.


Who created the hoax?


Te'o told Schaap that the hoax was created by a man named Ronaiah Tuiasosopo and that Te'o had no role in creating the hoax.


He said Tuiasosopo contacted him Wednesday via Twitter and explained that he created the hoax and he apologized, Schaap said. Tuiasosopo told Te'o he created the hoax along with another man and a woman, ESPN reported. CNN has not seen the tweets Te'o allegedly got from Tuiasosopo.


"Two guys and a girl are responsible for the whole thing," Te'o said, according to ESPN.


CNN has been to the California home of Tuiasosopo, but could not get a response to the accusations.


Tuiasosopo was also named in Wednesday's Deadspin article. That article implied that both Te'o and Tuiasosopo perpetuated the hoax.


Why did relatives say they had met her?


In September and October, when the story of Te'o and his girlfriend was getting a lot of press, there were several vivid stories about how they met. There was one written by South Bend Tribune in Indiana, the newspaper of Notre Dame's hometown, that said the couple met at a football game in Palo Alto, California, in 2009.


Te'o's father is quoted in the article that gushed about them shaking hands, exchanging phone numbers and sparking a love affair.


On Friday,Te'o said he lied to his father about meeting Kekua because he was embarrassed to tell his family that he was in love with a woman he never met.


"I knew that -- I even knew that it was crazy that I was with somebody that I didn't meet," he told ESPN. "And that alone, people find out that this girl who died I was so invested in, and I didn't meet her as well."


The lie he told his father led his family to tell reporters that Te'o had met his girlfriend, he told ESPN.


Why continue to talk about her after December 6 phone call?


Te'o received a call from a woman claiming to be his girlfriend on December 6, telling him she was not dead, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said at a news conference this week. Those calls continued, but Te'o did not answer, Swarbrick said.


The Heisman Trophy was awarded two days later, and Te'o continued to make comments about losing his girlfriend.


In the ESPN interview Te'o said he wasn't fully convinced that it was a hoax until Wednesday, Schaap said. That is why he continued to speak about and answer media questions about Kekua.


CNN's Phil Gast and Amanda Watts contributed to this report.






Read More..

T'eo to hoax doubters: "I wasn't part of this"

Updated 12:15 AM ET

SOUTH BEND, Ind. Manti Te'o gave an interview to ESPN in which he denied any involvement in fabricating an online relationship with a woman he considered to be his girlfriend.

"I wasn't faking it," he told ESPN Friday night. "I wasn't part of this."





13 Photos


Manti Te'o




Te'o also said that he did not make up anything to help his Heisman Trophy candidacy.

"When (people) hear the facts, they'll know," he said. "They'll know that there is no way that I could be part of this."

Te'o spoke at the IMG Training Academy in Bradenton, Fla., where he is preparing for the NFL draft. There were no cameras at the 2?-hour interview, which was recorded.

Earlier, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said during the taping of his weekly radio show that Te'o has to explain exactly how he was duped into an online relationship with a fictitious woman whose "death" was then faked by perpetrators of the scheme.

Skeptics have questioned the versions of events laid out by Te'o and Notre Dame, wondering why Te'o never said his relationship was with someone online and why he waited almost three weeks to tell the school about being duped.





Play Video


Will scandal affect Manti Te'o's NFL future?




According to Notre Dame, Te'o received a call on Dec. 6 from the girl he had only been in contact with by telephone and online, and who he thought had died in September. After telling his family what happened while he was home in Hawaii for Christmas, he informed Notre Dame coaches on Dec. 26.

Notre Dame said it hired investigators to look into Te'o's claims and their findings showed he was the victim of an elaborate hoax.





Play Video


Notre Dame rallies to Manti Te'o's side




Te'o released a statement on Wednesday, soon after Deadspin.com broke news of the scam with a lengthy story, saying he had been humiliated and hurt by the "sick joke." But he has laid low since.

ESPN officials posted a photo on Twitter late Friday night of reporter Jeremy Schapp with Te'o and his attorney. Te'o has been working out at the IMG Academy in Bradenton, Fla., as he prepares for the NFL combine and draft.





Play Video


Notre Dame athletic director: Faith in Te'o hasn't shaken "one iota"




Swarbrick said earlier in the day that he believed Te'o would ultimately speak publicly.

"We are certainly encouraging it to happen," he said. "We think it's important and we'd like to see it happen sooner rather than later."

He said thatmant before the Deadspin story, Te'o and his family had planned to go public with the story Monday.

"Sometimes the best laid plans don't quite work, and this was an example of that. Because the family lost the opportunity in some ways to control the story," he said. "It is in the Te'o family's court. We are very much encouraging them."

Former NFL coach Tony Dungy, who mentored Michael Vick when he returned to the NFL after doing prison time, had similar advice.




20 Photos


2013 BCS National Championship



"I don't know the whole case but I always advise people to face up to it and just talk to people and say what happened," Dungy said while attending the NCAA convention in Dallas on Friday. "The truth is the best liberator, so that's what I would do. And he's going to get questioned a lot about it."

Te'o led a lightly regarded Fighting Irish team to a 12-0 regular season and the BCS title game, where they were routed 42-14 by Alabama and Te'o played poorly.

Dungy said Te'o could face the toughest questions from NFL teams.

"If I was still coaching and we're thinking about taking this guy in the first round, you want to know not exactly what happened but what is going on with this young man and is it going to be a deterrent to him surviving in the NFL and is it going to stop him from being a star," Dungy said. "So just tell the truth about what happened and this is why, I think, that's the best thing."

Deadspin reported that friends and relatives of Ronaiah Tuiasosopo, a 22-year-old who lives in California, believe he created Kekua. The website also reported Te'o and Tuiasosopo knew each other — which has led to questions about Te'o's involvement in the hoax.

Swarbrick understands why there are questions.

"They have every right to say that," Swarbrick said "Now I have some more information than they have. But they have every right to say that. ... I just ask those people to apply the same skepticism to everything about this. I have no doubt the perpetrators have a story they will yet spin about what went on here. I hope skepticism also greets that when they're articulating what that is."

Read More..

Armstrong Tearful Over Telling Kids Truth













Lance Armstrong, 41, began to cry today as he described finding out his son Luke, 13, was publicly defending him from accusations that he doped during his cycling career.


Armstrong said that he knew, at that moment, that he would have to publicly admit to taking performance-enhancing drugs and having oxygen-boosting blood transfusions when competing in the Tour de France. He made those admissions to Oprah Winfrey in a two-part interview airing Thursday and tonight.


"When this all really started, I saw my son defending me, and saying, 'That's not true. What you're saying about my dad? That's not true,'" Armstrong said, tearing up during the second installment of his interview tonight. "And it almost goes to this question of, 'Why now?'


"That's when I knew I had to talk," Armstrong said. "He never asked me. He never said, 'Dad, is this true?' He trusted me."


He told Winfrey that he sat down with his children over the holidays to come clean about his drug use.


"I said, 'Listen, there's been a lot of questions about your dad, about my career and whether I doped or did not dope,'" he said he told them. "'I always denied that. I've always been ruthless and defiant about that, which is why you defended me, which makes it even sicker' I said, 'I want you to know that it's true.'"


He added that his mother was "a wreck" over the scandal.


Armstrong said that the lowest point in his fall from grace and the top of the cycling world came when his cancer charity, Livestrong, asked him to consider stepping down.






George Burns/Harpo Studios, Inc.











Lance Armstrong-Winfrey Interview: How Honest Was He? Watch Video









Lance Armstrong-Winfrey Interview: Doping Confession Watch Video







After the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency alleged in October that Armstrong doped throughout his reign as Tour de France champion, Armstrong said, his major sponsors -- including Nike, Anheuser Busch and Trek -- called one by one to end their endorsement contracts with him.


"Everybody out," he said. "Still not the most humbling moment."


Then came the call from Livestrong, the charity he founded at age 25 when he was diagnosed with testicular cancer.


"The story was getting out of control, which was my worst nightmare," he said. "I had this place in my mind that they would all leave. The one I didn't think would leave was the foundation.


"That was most humbling moment," he said.


Armstrong first stepped down as chairman of the board for the charity before being asked to end his association with the charity entirely. Livestrong is now run independently of Armstrong.


"I don't think it was 'We need you to step down,' but, 'We need you to consider stepping down for yourself,'" he said, recounting the call. "I had to think about that a lot. None of my kids, none of my friends have said, 'You're out,' and the foundation was like my sixth child. To make that decision, to step aside, that was big."


In Thursday's interview installment, the seven-time winner of the Tour de France admitted publicly for the first time that he doped throughout his career, confirming after months of angry denials the findings of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which stripped him of his titles in October.


He told Winfrey that he was taking the opportunity to confess to everything he had done wrong, including for years angrily denying claims that he had doped.


READ MORE: Armstrong Admits to Doping


WATCH: Armstrong's Many Denials Caught on Tape


READ MORE: 10 Scandalous Public Confessions






Read More..

U.S. 'needs tougher child labor rules'




Cristina Traina says in his second term, Obama must address weaknesses in child farm labor standards




STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • Cristina Traina: Obama should strengthen child farm labor standards

  • She says Labor Dept. rules allow kids to work long hours for little pay on commercial farms

  • She says Obama administration scrapped Labor Dept. chief's proposal for tightening rules

  • She says Labor Dept. must fix lax standards for kid labor on farmers; OSHA must enforce them




Editor's note: Cristina L.H. Traina is a Public Voices Op Ed fellow and professor at Northwestern University, where she is a scholar of social ethics.


(CNN) -- President Barack Obama should use the breathing space provided by the fiscal-cliff compromise to address some of the issues that he shelved during his last term. One of the most urgent is child farm labor. Perhaps the least protected, underpaid work force in American labor, children are often the go-to workers for farms looking to cut costs.


It's easy to see why. The Department of Labor permits farms to pay employees under 20 as little as $4.25 per hour. (By comparison, the federal minimum wage is $7.25.) And unlike their counterparts in retail and service, child farm laborers can legally work unlimited hours at any hour of day or night.


The numbers are hard to estimate, but between direct hiring, hiring through labor contractors, and off-the-books work beside parents or for cash, perhaps 400,000 children, some as young as 6, weed and harvest for commercial farms. A Human Rights Watch 2010 study shows that children laboring for hire on farms routinely work more than 10 hours per day.


As if this were not bad enough, few labor safety regulations apply. Children 14 and older can work long hours at all but the most dangerous farm jobs without their parents' consent, if they do not miss school. Children 12 and older can too, as long as their parents agree. Unlike teen retail and service workers, agricultural laborers 16 and older are permitted to operate hazardous machinery and to work even during school hours.


In addition, Human Rights Watch reports that child farm laborers are exposed to dangerous pesticides; have inadequate access to water and bathrooms; fall ill from heat stroke; suffer sexual harassment; experience repetitive-motion injuries; rarely receive protective equipment like gloves and boots; and usually earn less than the minimum wage. Sometimes they earn nothing.


Little is being done to guarantee their safety. In 2011 Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis proposed more stringent agricultural labor rules for children under 16, but Obama scrapped them just eight months later.


Adoption of the new rules would be no guarantee of enforcement, however. According to the 2010 Human Rights Watch report, the Department of Labor employees were spread so thin that, despite widespread reports of infractions they found only 36 child labor violations and two child hazardous order violations in agriculture nationwide.


This lack of oversight has dire, sometimes fatal, consequences. Last July, for instance, 15-year-old Curvin Kropf, an employee at a small family farm near Deer Grove, Illinois, died when he fell off the piece of heavy farm equipment he was operating, and it crushed him. According to the Bureau County Republican, he was the fifth child in fewer than two years to die at work on Sauk Valley farms.


If this year follows trends, Curvin will be only one of at least 100 children below the age of 18 killed on American farms, not to mention the 23,000 who will be injured badly enough to require hospital admission. According to Center for Disease Control and Prevention statistics, agriculture is one of the most dangerous industries. It is the most dangerous for children, accounting for about half of child worker deaths annually.


The United States has a long tradition of training children in the craft of farming on family farms. At least 500,000 children help to work their families' farms today.


Farm parents, their children, and the American Farm Bureau objected strenuously to the proposed new rules. Although children working on their parents' farms would specifically have been exempted from them, it was partly in response to worries about government interference in families and loss of opportunities for children to learn agricultural skills that the Obama administration shelved them.






Whatever you think of family farms, however, many child agricultural workers don't work for their parents or acquaintances. Despite exposure to all the hazards, these children never learn the craft of farming, nor do most of them have the legal right to the minimum wage. And until the economy stabilizes, the savings farms realize by hiring children makes it likely that even more of them will be subject to the dangers of farm work.


We have a responsibility for their safety. As one of the first acts of his new term, Obama should reopen the child agricultural labor proposal he shelved in spring of 2012. Surely, farm labor standards for children can be strengthened without killing off 4-H or Future Farmers of America.


Second, the Department of Labor must institute age, wage, hour and safety regulations that meet the standards set by retail and service industry rules. Children in agriculture should not be exposed to more risks, longer hours, and lower wages at younger ages than children in other jobs.


Finally, the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration must allocate the funds necessary for meaningful enforcement of child labor violations. Unenforced rules won't protect the nearly million other children who work on farms.


Agriculture is a great American tradition. Let's make sure it's not one our children have to die for.


Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.


Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.



The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Cristina Traina.






Read More..

IDA to review adequacy of mobile operators' network resilience






SINGAPORE: The Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (IDA) will review the adequacy of the network resilience, and back-up plans and arrangements of mobile operators.

This follows the disruption in M1 mobile services this week.

IDA said it takes serious view of M1's service disruption.

It will investigate the service outage thoroughly under the Code of Practice for Telecommunication Service Resiliency and take necessary actions if there is a breach of the code.

It also urged the telco to actively review and address subscribers' feedback and concerns arising from the outage.

M1 restored full 3G service in affected areas on Thursday -- more than 60 hours after it went down.

- CNA/al



Read More..

Lie, spin, repeat: Armstrong admits drug use 'too late'


































Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years





<<


<





1




2




3




4




5




6




7




8




9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25




26




27



>


>>







STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • NEW: Critics say Armstrong's confession is not the whole truth

  • "I was a bully," he says about retaliating against people who accused him of doping

  • Armstrong says he regrets fighting the USADA, when the agency claimed he had doped

  • "I will spend the rest of my life ... trying to earn back trust and apologize," Armstrong says




Share your thoughts on the downfall of Lance Armstrong at CNN iReport, Facebook or Twitter.


(CNN) -- After years of tenacious spin that he was innocent, Lance Armstrong has backpedaled in a confessional interview with Oprah Winfrey.


He admitted unequivocally to using performance enhancing drugs in his seven Tour de France wins.


But his critics say he is still spinning the story.


Armstrong has, in the past, persistently and angrily denied the allegations -- even under oath.


And he has persecuted former close associates who went public against him. "We sued so many people," Armstrong told Winfrey -- people who were telling the truth.






12 telling quotes over the years from Armstrong




Did he use the blood enhancing hormone EPO? Testosterone? Cortisone? Human growth hormone? Illegal blood transfusions and other blood doping?


Armstrong answered "yes" on all counts in the first installment of a two-part interview that aired Thursday night. Part two airs Friday on Winfrey's OWN channel and online.


The disgraced cyclist, who has been stripped of his Tour de France titles and an Olympic bronze medal, blamed no one but himself for his doping decisions, careful not to implicate others.




Armstrong: I was "a bully"




Armstrong described himself as "deeply flawed" and "arrogant," and spoke often of how so much was his "fault."


"I was a bully," he told Winfrey of how he treated others who might expose him.


But Armstrong was not telling the whole story, author David Coyle, who wrote a book about doping and the Tour de France, told CNN's Anderson Cooper Thursday night.


"A partial confession is sort of the pattern here," he said. "Maybe this is Armstrong's partial, and more will come out later."




iReport: Tell us your take on the first part of the interview


The cyclist denied pushing teammates to dope, an assertion Coyle countered.


"Tyler Hamilton gets a phone call: be on a plane tomorrow. We're flying to Valencia to do a blood transfusion. That's what happens," Coyle said.


Armstrong told Winfrey that doping was widespread at the time and just as much "part of the job" as water bottles and tire pumps. This attitude prompted Winfrey to ask again if he really didn't coerce other teammates to dope.


Bill Strickland, an editor for Bicycling Magazine, praised Armstrong for the confessions he did make.


"I think it's clear what we're seeing here is someone learning to tell the truth," he said.


Both men described the interview as a "therapy session."


Appearing tense but sometimes cathartic, Armstrong told Winfrey it was a happy day for him to be there with her.


He described his years of denial as "one big lie that I repeated a lot of times." He had races to win and a fairy tale image to keep up.


Armstrong reminisced on his storied past of being a hero who overcame cancer winning the Tour repeatedly, having a happy marriage, children. "It's just this mythic, perfect story, and it isn't true," he said.


It was impossible to live up to it, he said, and it fell apart.


Bleacher Report: Twitter erupts Thursday night


The lies and aggressive pursuit of those debunking them was about controlling the narrative. "If I didn't like what somebody said...I tried to control that and said that's a lie; they're liars," Armstrong said. It's a tactic he has followed his entire life, he said.


"Now the story is so bad and so toxic, and a lot of it is true," Armstrong said.


The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which tests Olympic athletes for performance enhancing drugs, praised the interview as a "small step in the right direction."


But it seemed to share Coyle's skepticism about whether Armstrong was exposing the whole truth.


"If he is sincere in his desire to correct his past mistakes, he will testify under oath about the full extent of his doping activities," said USADA CEO Travis Tygart.


Years of success and defiance, then a rapid fall


The scandal has tarred the cancer charity Livestrong that he founded and blown his endorsement deals.


Those who suffered for speaking out now feel vindicated.


They include Betsy Andreu, wife of fellow cyclist Frankie Andreu, who said she overheard Armstrong acknowledge to a doctor treating him for cancer in 1996 that he had used performance-enhancing drugs.


"This was a guy who used to be my friend, who decimated me," Andreu told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Thursday night. "He could have come clean. He owed it to me. He owes it to the sport that he destroyed."


The former athletic icon conceded he'd let down many fans "who believed in me and supported me."


"I will spend the rest of my life ... trying to earn back trust and apologize to people."


After winning various legs of the Tour de France, Armstrong's sporting career ground to a halt in 1996, when he was diagnosed with cancer. He was 25.


He told Winfrey that he then developed a "ruthless and relentless" attitude that helped him survive. But he carried it with him into his sports career, "and that's bad," he said.


He returned to the cycling world, however. His breakthrough came in 1999, and he didn't stop as he reeled off seven straight wins in his sport's most prestigious race. Allegations of doping began during this time, as did Armstrong's vehement defiance.


He left the sport after his last win, in 2005, only to return to the tour in 2009.


Armstrong still insists he was clean when he finished third that year, but that comeback led to his downfall.


"We wouldn't be sitting here if I didn't come back," he told Winfrey.


In 2011, Armstrong retired once more from cycling. But his fight to maintain his clean reputation continued. Federal prosecutors launched a criminal investigation, but it was dropped in February.


In April, the USADA notified Armstrong of an investigation into new doping charges. In response, the cyclist accused the organization of trying to "dredge up discredited" allegations and filed a lawsuit in federal court trying to halt the case.


The USADA found "overwhelming" evidence that Armstrong was involved in "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program."


Armstrong objected to the claim to Winfrey, saying that although it was "professional," it did not compare to doping programs in former communist East Germany.


Armstrong told Winfrey that the unraveling of his career is the second time in his life that he could not control his life's narrative -- the last time was when he had cancer.


Livestrong: Tell the truth about doping


CNN's Carol Cratty, Joseph Netto and George Howell contributed to this report.






Read More..

Navy ship gets stuck on coral reef in Philippines

MANILA, Philippines Most of the sailors on a U.S. Navy minesweeper that struck a coral reef in the Philippines left the ship Friday for safety reasons after initial efforts to free the vessel failed, the Navy said.

The ship ran aground Thursday while in transit through the Tubbataha National Marine Park, a coral sanctuary in the Sulu Sea, 400 miles southwest of Manila. There were no injuries or oil leaks, and Philippine authorities were trying to evaluate damage to the protected coral reef, designated by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site.

The U.S. Navy's 7th Fleet said 72 of the 79 crew of the USS Guardian were transferred to a military support vessel by small boat. A small team of personnel will remain aboard and attempt to free the ship with minimal environmental impact, the statement said. The remaining seven sailors, including the commanding and the executive officer, will also be transferred if conditions become unsafe.

Philippine officials said the weather was choppy Friday with strong winds and rough seas.

The World Wide Fund for Nature Philippines said that according to an initial visual inspection, the 74-yard-long, 1,300-ton Guardian damaged at least 10 yards of the reef. Aerial photographs provided by the Philippine military showed the ship's bow sitting atop corals in shallow turquoise waters. The stern was floating in the deep blue waters. The Navy said the cause of the grounding, which took place around 2 a.m. Thursday, was under investigation.

Angelique Songco, head of the government's Protected Area Management Board, said it was unclear how much of the reef was damaged. She said the government imposes a fine of about $300 per square yard of damaged coral.

In 2005, the environmental group Greenpeace was fined almost $7,000 after its flagship struck a reef in the same area.

Songco said that park rangers were not allowed to board the ship for inspection and were told to contact the U.S. Embassy in Manila. Their radio calls to the ship were ignored, she said. The U.S. Navy statement said that "the government of the Philippines was promptly informed of the incident and is being updated regularly."

Philippine military spokesman Maj. Oliver Banaria said the U.S. Navy did not request assistance from the Philippines.

U.S. Navy ships have stepped up visits to Philippine ports for refueling, rest and recreation, plus joint military exercises as a result of a redeployment of U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific region.

The Philippines, a U.S. defense treaty ally, has been entangled in a territorial dispute with China in the South China Sea.

Read More..

Armstrong Admits to Doping, 'One Big Lie'













Lance Armstrong, formerly cycling's most decorated champion and considered one of America's greatest athletes, confessed to cheating for at least a decade, admitting on Thursday that he owed all seven of his Tour de France titles and the millions of dollars in endorsements that followed to his use of illicit performance-enhancing drugs.


After years of denying that he had taken banned drugs and received oxygen-boosting blood transfusions, and attacking his teammates and competitors who attempted to expose him, Armstrong came clean with Oprah Winfrey in an exclusive interview, admitting to using banned substances for years.


"I view this situation as one big lie that I repeated a lot of times," he said. "I know the truth. The truth isn't what was out there. The truth isn't what I said.


"I'm a flawed character, as I well know," Armstrong added. "All the fault and all the blame here falls on me."


In October, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency issued a report in which 11 former Armstrong teammates exposed the system with which they and Armstrong received drugs with the knowledge of their coaches and help of team physicians.






George Burns/Courtesy of Harpo Studios, Inc./AP Photo













Lance Armstrong Admits Using Performance-Enhancing Drugs Watch Video









Lance Armstrong's Oprah Confession: The Consequences Watch Video





The U.S. Postal Service Cycling Team "ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in its report.


As a result of USADA's findings, Armstrong was stripped of his Tour de France titles. Soon, longtime sponsors including Nike began to abandon him, too.


READ MORE: Did Doping Cause Armstrong's Cancer?


Armstrong said he was driven to cheat by a "ruthless desire to win."


He told Winfrey that his competition "cocktail" consisted of EPO, blood transfusions and testosterone, and that he had previously used cortisone. He would not, however, give Winfrey the details of when, where and with whom he doped during seven winning Tours de France between 1999 and 2005.


He said he stopped doping following his 2005 Tour de France victory and did not use banned substances when he placed third in 2009 and entered the tour again in 2010.


"It was a mythic perfect story and it wasn't true," Armstrong said of his fairytale story of overcoming testicular cancer to become the most celebrated cyclist in history.


READ MORE: 10 Scandalous Public Confessions


PHOTOS: Olympic Doping Scandals: Past and Present


PHOTOS: Tour de France 2012


Armstrong would not name other members of his team who doped, but admitted that as the team's captain he set an example. He admitted he was "a bully" but said there "there was a never a directive" from him that his teammates had to use banned substances.


"At the time it did not feel wrong?" Winfrey asked.


"No," Armstrong said. "Scary."


"Did you feel bad about it?" she asked again.


"No," he said.


Armstrong said he thought taking the drugs was similar to filling his tires with air and bottle with water. He never thought of his actions as cheating, but "leveling the playing field" in a sport rife with doping.






Read More..

Did Scientology ad cross line?




The Church of Scientology is also at fault for thinking the advertorial would survive The Atlantic readers' scrutiny, Ian Schafer says.




STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • The Atlantic published and pulled a sponsored Scientology "story"

  • Ian Schafer: On several levels, the ad was a mistake

  • He says the content was heavy-handed and comments were being moderated

  • Schafer: Experimenting to raise revenue makes sense, but standards should be clear




Editor's note: Ian Schafer is the founder and CEO of a digital advertising agency, Deep Focus, and the alter ego of @invisibleobama. You can read his rants on his blog at ianschafer.com.


(CNN) -- "The Atlantic is America's leading destination for brave thinking and bold ideas that matter. The Atlantic engages its print, online, and live audiences with breakthrough insights into the worlds of politics, business, the arts, and culture. With exceptional talent deployed against the world's most important and intriguing topics, The Atlantic is the source of opinion, commentary, and analysis for America's most influential individuals who wish to be challenged, informed, and entertained." -- The Atlantic 2013 media kit for advertisers


On Monday, The Atlantic published -- and then pulled -- a story titled "David Miscavige Leads Scientology to Milestone Year." This "story" went on to feature the growth of Scientology in 2012.



Ian Schafer

Ian Schafer



Any regular reader of The Atlantic's content would immediately do a double-take upon seeing that kind of headline, much less the heavy-handed text below it, shamelessly plugging how well Scientology's "ecclesiastical leader" Miscavige has done in "leading a renaissance for the religion."


This "story" is one of several "advertorials" (a portmanteau of "advertising" and "editorials") that The Atlantic has published online, clearly designated as "Sponsor Content." In other words, "stories" like these aren't real stories. They are ads with a lot of words, which advertisers have paid publications to run on their behalf for decades. You may have seen them in magazines and newspapers as "special advertising sections."


The hope is that because you are already reading the publication, hey, maybe you'll read what the advertiser has to say, too -- instead of the "traditional" ad that they may have otherwise placed on the page that you probably won't remember, or worse, will ignore.



There's nothing wrong with this tactic, ethically, when clearly labeled as "sponsored" or "advertising." But many took umbrage with The Atlantic in this particular case; so many, that The Atlantic responded by pulling the story from its site -- which was the right thing to do -- and by apologizing.


At face value, The Atlantic did the right thing for its business model, which depends upon advertising sales. It sold what they call a "native" ad to a paying advertiser, clearly labeled it as such, without the intention of misleading readers into thinking this was a piece of journalism.


But it still failed on several levels.


The Atlantic defines its readers as "America's most influential individuals who wish to be challenged, informed, and entertained." By that very definition, it is selling "advertorials" to people who are the least likely to take them seriously, especially when heavy-handed. There is a fine line between advertorial and outright advertising copywriting, and this piece crossed it. The Church of Scientology is just as much at fault for thinking this piece would survive The Atlantic readers' intellectual scrutiny. But this isn't even the real issue.


Bad advertising is all around us. And readers' intellectual scrutiny would surely have let the advertorial piece slide without complaints (though snark would be inevitable), as they have in the past, or yes, even possibly ignored it. But here's where The Atlantic crossed another line -- it seemed clear it was moderating the comments beneath the advertorial.


As The Washington Post reported, The Atlantic marketing team was carefully pruning the comments, ensuring that they were predominantly positive, even though many readers were leaving negative comments. So while The Atlantic was publishing clearly labeled advertiser-written content, it was also un-publishing content created by its readers -- the very folks it exists to serve.


It's understandable that The Atlantic would inevitably touch a third rail with any "new" ad format. But what it calls "native advertising" is actually "advertorial." It's not new at all. Touching the third rail in this case is unacceptable.


So what should The Atlantic have done in this situation before it became a situation? For starters, it should have worked more closely with the Church of Scientology to help create a piece of content that wasn't so clearly written as an ad. If the Church of Scientology was not willing to compromise its advertising to be better content, then The Atlantic should not have accepted the advertising. But this is a quality-control issue.


The real failure here was that comments should never have been enabled beneath this sponsored content unless the advertiser was prepared to let them be there, regardless of sentiment.


It's not like Scientology has avoided controversy in the past. The sheer, obvious reason for this advertorial in the first place was to dispel beliefs that Scientology wasn't a recognized religion (hence "ecclesiastical").


Whether The Atlantic felt it was acting in its advertiser's best interest, or the advertiser specifically asked for this to happen, letting it happen at all was a huge mistake, and a betrayal of an implicit contract that should exist between a publication of The Atlantic's stature and its readership.


No matter how laughably "sales-y" a piece of sponsored content might be, the censoring of readership should be the true "third rail," never to be touched.


Going forward, The Atlantic (and any other publication that chooses to run sponsored content) should adopt and clearly communicate an explicit ethics statement regarding advertorials and their corresponding comments. This statement should guide the decisions it makes when working with advertisers, and serve as a filter for the sponsored content it chooses to publish, and what it recommends advertisers submit. It should also prevent readers from being silenced if given a platform at all.


As an advertising professional, I sincerely hope this doesn't spook The Atlantic or any other publication from experimenting with ways to make money. But as a reader, I hope it leads to better ads that reward me for paying attention, rather than muzzle my voice should I choose to interact with the content.


After all, what more could a publication or advertiser ask for than for content to be so interesting that someone actually would want to comment on (or better, share) it?


(Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly said native advertising accounts for 59% of the Atlantic's ad revenue. Digital advertising, of which native advertising is a part, accounts for 59% of The Atlantic's overall revenue, according to the company.)


Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.


Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.


The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ian Schafer.






Read More..