This classic of the "there are many sides to any ethical problem; the job of journalism is not to sharply evaluate anything, but to sentimentalize, confuse and entertain" moment of reporting was apparently meant to disinfect Armstrong of his strongest negatives and make him acceptable as a commentator in major sports programming again. The whole thing ends with a kindly plug of his current broadcasting endeavors. The parts of this that are hardest to take are the travelogue-like images of Armstrong tooling about reflectively in a boat or surveying his domains while easy-listening docu-muzak sets an elegiac, disinfecting tone. There is far more footage of this (admittedly charming) manipulative narcissist rationalizing his misdeeds than there are details of his hate-campaigns against anyone who could have revealed his fraudulence; he implies he is just like any other cyclist of the PED era; give a con-man a break, he all but pleads. But he wasn't simply like Zabel or Basso (other major cyclists of the PED era); they didn't slander, sue, and try to destroy careers to throw people off the trail of their doings. The docu barely covers what Armstrong did to the Adreus (though Betsy is interviewed on camera, the details of Armstrong's threat and slander campaign are not vivid) and to Greg LeMond, who attributes the loss of a 25 million dollar business to Armstrong's machinations with Trek bicycles in the aughts. For a fuller narrative this needs to be paired with "Stop at Nothing" with its detailed interviews with LeMond, the Andreus, and journalists who were not fooled by Armstrong. Watch this with shots of cultural (who stands to gain by this?) and ethical (what is the cost of equating Armstrong with cyclists-in-general c. 2000?) skepticism.