Doping

why is cycling picked on

Because, in contrast with other sports, it's easy to show that the biggest event in the cycling calendar was repeatedly "won" by the use of a large scale and highly effective doping conspiracy. It's easy to speculate on the effect of kickball players' doping on the outcome of matches, but it's much harder to draw a simple linear narrative.

Well, this is a plausible and possible explanation, but I feel it gives too much credence to the idea that 'news' in newspapers has much connection with real life events.

'A newspaper contains as many of its proprietor's opinions as his advertisers will allow him to print.'

I've delayed this post because I've wasted a lot of time trying to discover who wrote this (it certainly wasn't me -it's far too clever for that). However I feel it may give at least a clue to what's going on. Essentially there's very little money in the bike trade when compared to the motor industry and its associates (roadbuilding etc).

I think it may not be generally understood that newspapers have an 'agenda'. This may be long term (eg Telegraph = Tory, Guardian = Remain/rejoin), but there are also transient threads - e.g. electric scooters are fun! The Guardian is not keen on cyclesport, but when the subject is a feisty woman their ears prick up:

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/feb/21/ethel-brambleby-obituary

What chance of publication for a not terribly succesful male racing cyclist's obit ?

So, my point is that for many decades the medias' agenda has been anti cyclesport. I believe that it's now just possible that cycling's green credentials might change this and it's up to us to push for change.