The cycling media may be struggling and shrinking… but that’s not an excuse to shill for murderous regimes and crap cycling routes

A recent commentary from George Hill on *road.cc* has sharply criticised unnamed cycling media outlets for engaging in partnerships perceived as ethically compromised. The article specifically calls out instances where publications, ostensibly struggling financially, have promoted content linked to "murderous regimes" or "crap cycling routes," suggesting a concerning trend of prioritising revenue over journalistic integrity and reader trust.

This critique arrives amidst a challenging financial landscape for cycling media, where advertising revenues are tightening and subscription models are often insufficient. The pressure to secure alternative funding streams is palpable, yet such partnerships risk alienating a discerning audience. Historically, cycling publications have navigated commercial pressures, but the current climate, coupled with increasing scrutiny of content provenance, amplifies the ethical tightrope walk for outlets attempting to survive without sacrificing their core values.

Ultimately, this is less about survival and more about self-respect. If the price of staying afloat is shilling for the indefensible, perhaps it's time to re-evaluate the business model, or indeed, the business itself.