how do the election results reflect doping culture and beliefs?

i had initially been tempted to simply write that there was no discernible relationship between what was witnessed in the united states election and performance enhancing drug opinions. however, i think this poses and interesting intersection and something worth giving at least a moment of your attention. whether or not you are satisfied with the results of the election, there are important trends that can retrospectively be pulled from the chaos and help frame the outcome.

firstly, the role of technology in this election was, as with all elections, unprecedented. social media played an even greater role throughout the primaries and general election than even twitter or facebook were able to predict - given their apparent scrambling to try and curb online harassment and distribution of fabricated ‘news’ stories. this reliance on a ‘free’ medium for spreading and cultivating ideas meant that two major candidates in this election cycle, trump and sanders, were able to spend far less money than their opponent, and still impact and influence millions of supporters. it is reasonable to say that because of this digital age, the barrier to entry for true grassroots movements and the mobilization of individuals is the lowest it has ever been. the amount of money raised looks like it is no longer the largest consideration in predicting the winning candidate. anyone with a camera and internet connection can get their message out to millions of people - we are no longer beholden to media conglomerates to get our news and perspectives. in terms of the impact on doping then, this means that we no longer have to rely on corporate media outlets, that are influenced by their need for access to athletes and sporting bodies, to hold athletes accountable. we can spread our anti-doping message online and question these ‘authorities’ en masse and create a ground-swell of sports fans and responsible citizens that are sick and tired of the corruption and quid pro quo in doping control. of course, there is also the significant issue of social media trapping us inside our own bubble, failing to connect and communicate with those of a differing opinion. so, we have the tools to make our voice heard, but we have to also be willing to reach out to those we disagree with so we can all move forward together.

secondly, whether it was a significant determining factor or not remains to be seen, but hacking played a role in this election. whether it was the hack on the democratic national committee or the confirmed (maybe) hacks on secretary clinton’s email server, we are clearly living in a time where digitized information is difficult to secure. as someone interested in cyber-security, this isn’t necessarily going to result in a positive impact in the world, but it does mean that the time of data and correspondence being reasonably considered private has passed. what this means for dopers and doping-control is yet to fully play out, but the fancy bears saga and the russian state-sponsored doping have certainly felt its effects.

lastly, it is safe to say that a significant portion of trump voters were influenced by an anti-establishment mentality. too many people have felt for too long that they have been overlooked by those that were meant to represent their interests and have responded loudly and boldly. brexit was certainly another manifestation of this phenomena. clearly there is a rebellion against the status quo and this is reflected within the doping world. whether the concept of omertà is still as strong as it once was is difficult to determine, but the backlash against wiggins for his systematically approved doping is demonstrating that the public is getting just as fed up with being duped by authority figures in the world of sports as they are in politics.

will this election have direct impacts on doping or performance enhancing drugs? i have no idea. but you can feel a groundswell happening, and we have to make sure the world of performance enhancing drug use comes out on the other side in a better state than we are in today.