MXA Versus RC
by Robert Beaupre

“Just like two years ago, Ricky Carmichael won the 250 Supercross Championship while making somebody else look good...In 2005, James Stewart is going to leave the Supercross series as the hero of the hour--while RC will have the Supercross title. RC will have to regain lost honor in the outdoor series. Sometimes winning isn’t enough--it’s how you win that counts.”

--Motocross Action, July 2005

With the motocross world buzzing over Motocross Action’s recent critique of Ricky Carmichael’s supercross season and bike setup (and his subsequent rebuttals in the press), the question of how riders and motojournalists ought to relate to each other has made a rare appearance at the forefront.

I have always felt that it is correct for MXA (and other motocross magazines) to take forthright stances on the sport. That’s exactly what publications of all sorts should ideally do. And while I often disagree with MXA’s views on a particular rider or situation, its hardline opinions are unique in a world where the motocross establishment and journalists often seem increasingly cozy with one another.

What is unnerving about the situation involving MXA and RC is not that people disagree with the magazine’s stance. It is instead that many feel that MXA should apologize for publishing something critical of the champ.

This is wrong. Regardless of what you thought of Carmichael’s supercross season, it is contradictory to the ideals of free speech and press to demand an apology from a magazine for publishing its view on a situation. And if there’s anyone who should feel secure against the criticism of editors, it’s RC and his fans.

Nonetheless, some are eager to scold MXA because it called out a hero. As shown on the MXA website, the magazine has received a slew of angry letters promising boycotts of the magazine for its comments on Carmichael. Many of the messages read like this one:

Dear MXA,

To slam Ricky is truly an insult, but it also says something about you. Or did you not think that the things you envy or dislike you see in others you see inside yourselves first? You would be well advised to not only offer (on your knees with a contrite heart) an apology to Ricky, Roger, Mike, Mr. & Mrs. Carmichael, Suzuki and all the people in our sport, public and private, as well as to God for taking cheap shots at one of His children.

Why any magazine would owe anybody an apology (on their knees, no less) for its opinion on a motorcycle rider is beyond me. A reminder: the rightful job of a sports magazine (or newspaper, television or radio station) is to truthfully report on what is occurring before it--with no veneer resting upon any athlete or organization. We may not all agree with MXA, but its view is simply one perpective in an increasingly vast sport. We would all do well to remember that.

Even as soft interviews and expansive photo sections grow more popular in motocross magazines, there should still remain journalistic voices that call into question the powers-that-be in motocross. That includes the riders. Was MXA overly harsh on RC? Maybe. Should it be made the subject of contempt for that? My answer, out of reverence for respectful disagreement between reasonable perspectives, is an unequivocal no.

If we allow ourselves to believe that it’s in bad taste for motojournalists to take critical views of the upper echelons of our sport, we might soon be stuck with a motocross press that resembles Entertainment Tonight--a useless collection of celebrity worship, ill-placed envy and little else.

And don’t feel too bad for Ricky. One of the most reputable sources in all of sports--the scoreboard--remains firmly on his side.


Send the author a comment on this column.