Techniques of deceptive communication about doping

Abstract

The decision to dope almost inevitably implies the decision to engage in deceptive communication. We, therefore, analysed six autobiographies of deceiving cyclists and identified six communication techniques which deceivers routinely apply: (1) moralisation without personal criticism, (2) exaggerating the intensity of anti-doping policies, (3) victimisation, (4) playing down the extent of the doping problem, (5) omitting narrative details, and (6) pretending lack of doping-relevant knowledge. These techniques help deceivers to present themselves as compliant with the anti-doping system and appear credible in their commitment against drugs. Furthermore, it helps them to allay suspicion, prevent falsification, and generally manage the flow of destructive information in a way that avoids leakage and detection. Though there is no reliable cue to deceit, knowledge about deceivers’ communication techniques might increase awareness and help to ask critical questions.

Keywords:

• Doping
• deception
• lying
• cycling
• Lance Armstrong

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Armstrong’s autobiographies are coauthored by the journalist Sally Jenkins. Most athletes’ autobiographies are written with coauthors, usually journalists, who help to transform the life stories into books for a popular audience.

2 Floyd Landis was a teammate of Armstrong from 2002 to 2004 and won the Tour de France in 2006. However, during this Tour, Landis tested positive, was stripped of his title and banned. In the following years, Landis constantly denied doping and appealed the ban. In his autobiography (Landis & Mooney, 2007), he gave a personal account of the case and maintained his innocence. However, in 2010, Landis finally admitted to doping.

3 Johann Bruyneel had a minor career as a professional cyclist, but later achieved extraordinary success as director of Armstrong’s team, US Postal, leading Armstrong to seven consecutive Tour victories between 1999 and 2005. Bruyneel’s autobiography (Bruyneel & Strickland, 2011), first published in 2008, primarily covers these years and gives a personal account of the team’s path to success. However, in the wake of United States Anti-Doping Agency’s investigation, it became clear that Bruyneel was at the apex of a doping conspiracy. In 2014, Bruyneel was given a ten-year ban from any type of involvement in competitions.

4 Michael Barry raced as a support rider for the US Postal team and later Team Sky. He published two autobiographies: his first book (Barry, 2005) constitutes an autobiographical report about the team. In his second book (Barry, 2014), he admitted to doping after the United States Anti-Doping Agency’s investigation. He was stripped of all race results between 13 May 2003 and 31 July 2006.

5 Udo Bölts raced as a support rider for the German Team Telekom with Tour de France winners Bjarne Riis (1996) and Jan Ullrich (1997). His autobiography (Bölts & Kullmann, 2006) was written in German and published in 2006. In the wake of doping allegations and investigations against Team Telekom in 2007, Bölts admitted to using prohibited drugs from 1996 to 1997.

6 Narrative analysis usually distinguishes between three different types of texts: narration, description and argumentation. Narration is the detailed telling of a story and refers to a concrete chain of events, actions and experiences of an individual. In contrast, description doesn’t refer to concrete situations. It is, rather, a synthesis of facts which generally summarises events and actions. Argumentation is the most abstract type of text. It offers general explanations and provides the reader with the author’s subjective theories, attitudes and ideas. Especially relevant to our analysis is that different types of text include different levels of detail: argumentation and description are characterised by a low level of detail, whereas narration contains many details, including concrete biographical events, experiences and actions (Kallmeyer & Schütze, 1977).