›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Olympics 2016

«13

Comments

  • Luke BurrageLuke Burrage
  • MATATATMATATAT
    I have to be on call for the Olympics so I'm not really happy about that.
  • RymRym
    I'm surprised at how many people around me in my daily life aren't aware they're even happening, or else at best have a vague idea that they're happening but aren't watching anything and have no idea when they started or will stop.

    Compared to last time, a tiny minority of my twitter feed has said ANYTHING about the games. So few that the absence was notable.

    The only events I've watched have been in GIF form from one twitter account.
  • no fun girlno fun girl
    edited August 2016
    I would enjoy watching, but I don't really have a source that isn't going to be.. nationalistic.. in its presentation. Then again, what are the olympics (and related media) except an allotted expression of nationalism? Anyone with a more performance centered source, please speak up.
    Post edited by no fun girl on
  • MATATATMATATAT
    edited August 2016
    no fun girl said:

    I would enjoy watching, but I don't really have a source that isn't going to be.. nationalistic.. in its presentation. Then again, what are the olympics (and related media) except an allotted expression of nationalism? Anyone with a more performance centered source, please speak up.

    I was talking to a coworker from Quebec and he was saying how he's sorta surprised this year it's toned down quite a bit. Also the OTT efforts of our company and our partnership with NBC is supposed to allow people to be more independent in what sports and teams they watch from their devices.

    I can't speak for the commentators though...
    Post edited by MATATAT on
  • AprecheApreche
    no fun girl said:

    I would enjoy watching, but I don't really have a source that isn't going to be.. nationalistic.. in its presentation. Then again, what are the olympics (and related media) except an allotted expression of nationalism? Anyone with a more performance centered source, please speak up.

    If you can get the NBC live streams to work for the non-televised sports, there basically no commentary. You just watch the sport as if you were a spectator who was very very close to the action.
  • sK0pesK0pe
    Similar to everyone else I've not really paid attention to it, Twitter feed makes it seem non-existent other than the poor political state of Brazil and poor broadcast media coverage.
  • ChurbaChurba
    I pretty much only ever watched the Olympics when a family friend was on the swimming team. Since then, I check the medal tallies, and watch a few highlight reels, but I honestly don't really care much about it.
  • GeoffGeoff
    I'm quite looking forward to climbing being introduced in 2020.

    I've watched bugger all so far this year, as I've just got home from four days camping up in the Lake District/dragging my fat arse around one of those mud run/obstacle course dealies. I'll likely take a look at the archery and judo when I get a moment though.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    I have serious moral objections to the Olympics - from the customary displacement and burden on the poor in the the host country; the waste of resources; the advertisement tie-ins that have nothing to do with sport; the rampant nationalism and resultant othering; the income/remuneration restrictions placed on athletes; the pressures put on young children for highly competitive sport and the all too common physical, emotional, and psychological tolls of same; and so on. Even if I was more interested in watching competitive sport (participating is fun, but, to me, watching it is like watching someone take a test), I doubt I would watch the Olympics.
  • MattMatt
    I make it a point each year to watch some of the more obscure sports. For past few Olympics, the method Scott cited has been the best: stream the raw feed with no commentators at all. Other than the weird sports, I'll probably spend an hour watching canned highlights of the best moments. Although last night I did queue up 30 min of the women's rugby final.

    I know saying "booo nationalism!" is the high ground here, but I'm not taking it. The Olympics are the one venue where nationalism is the actual game, not an obstacle. Let's celebrate it.

    The other moral issues, I do share. The damage to host countries and the treatment of athletes is hard to look past. I stopped enjoying football b/c of health impacts, but for some reason I haven't rebelled against the Olympics in the same way. Maybe the short dose of Olympics makes it easier to look past the issues.

  • StarfoxStarfox
    Kate Monster said:

    the income/remuneration restrictions placed on athletes

    What restrictions are you talking about?
  • AprecheApreche
    The Olympics used to not be shitty, and they can not be shitty again. The thing is, regardless of how awful they are, they have kept their core intact. It is still a glorious competition of the world's greatest athletes. No matter how corrupt the IOC is, I can't not watch Usain Bolt run.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    edited August 2016
    Starfox said:

    Kate Monster said:

    the income/remuneration restrictions placed on athletes

    What restrictions are you talking about?
    IOC's restriction of athlete's sponsors and how they can display them (not at all) while competing. Lesser known/less popular athletes thrive on multiple, smaller sponsorship deals, but they cannot wear their sponsors' symbols on their uniforms/warm up suits, etc. unless the sponsor is an actual IOC sponsor. This means that less popular athletes have significantly limited income potentiality. For those athletes who cannot/do not get paid for their sport other than through competition wins and sponsorship, this can be crippling.

    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • StarfoxStarfox
    edited August 2016
    Isn't that always the case though? Stars get star deals.

    There's athletes that don't get paid at all. They still do it.
    Post edited by Starfox on
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    edited August 2016
    Starfox said:

    Isn't that always the case though? Stars get star deals.
    There's athletes that don't get paid at all. They still do it.

    Yeah, but this is a major money-maker for lots of people. The athletes themselves should benefit with remuneration, even the lesser known athletes.

    I am not saying that lesser known athletes are entitled to bigger sponsorships, just that the IOC shouldn't cut off an athlete's potential income stream.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • StarfoxStarfox
    Fair enough. But I suspect money isn't the primary motivator for most, if not nearly every athlete there.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    Starfox said:

    Fair enough. But I suspect money isn't the primary motivator for most, if not nearly every athlete there.

    Primary motivator, no. Actual necessity for some? Yes.
  • AprecheApreche
    Starfox said:

    Fair enough. But I suspect money isn't the primary motivator for most, if not nearly every athlete there.

    It's not the motivator, but it's necessary. An Olympic athlete (with a chance of winning, from a big country) has to spend pretty much their entire life training. They can make money from normal jobs, but that doesn't leave much time for life/sleeping. They have to make training their job. Who will pay for that? Pretty much only sponsors or donations.

    Even worse, for most sports you can only really compete in 3 Olympics, max. 4 is like, miracle level. Then what do you do with the rest of your life?

    The Olympics used to be very cheap. I think up until the '50s they got all their money just from collecting money from participating countries. They used all the money for the actual games themselves. Things like paying judges, maintaining fields, etc. The bare minimum to make the competition happen. Only amateur athletes were allowed to compete until the '70s.

    In the '50s the IOC president who had morals and didn't want corporate interests getting involved, retired. The new leadership was not so good. Due to television becoming a thing, they started making bank by selling broadcast rights. In the '70s they started relaxing the rules about amateurs-only, and pretty much ended them completely in the '90s. That's why we suddenly got the Dream Team.

    Since then the IOC has been so corrupt and hungry for moneys. They don't have anything to sell. They aren't a needed organization. They only exist now because TV networks and sponsors prop them up with millions of dollars. Therefore, they do whatever those sponsors demand, no matter how ridiculous.

    If one drink company is the sponsor, you can't even bring beverages made by any other company onto the grounds. Even as a spectator they can keep you out if you wear logos of competitors to official sponsors because they might be seen on TV. It gets so much worse than that. Read about it online if you want to be mad.

    And, like all things, the only people with the power to fix it, the countries themselves, won't. Why? The politicians all depend on corporate funding for elections! Duh.

    TL;DR: You won't find a photo of Jesse Owens next to any sort of advertisement, but I dare you to find a photo of Michael Phelps without one.
  • MattMatt
    In interest of seeing the best in the world do their athletic thing, I don't want those without means to be excluded. If throwing some money in the pot causes more people to compete, it'd be a truer competition.
  • no fun girlno fun girl
    Matt said:

    I know saying "booo nationalism!" is the high ground here, but I'm not taking it. The Olympics are the one venue where nationalism is the actual game, not an obstacle. Let's celebrate it.

    I'm not saying nationalism is bad. I'm saying only showing coverage of broadcaster's country's medal winners, or nationally stronger categories, or long stupid life stories when we could be watching the actual competition and the actual winners....
  • MattMatt
    Oh god the life story packages. I feel your pain.
  • StarfoxStarfox
    Yeah, that sucks. But nobody is forcing anyone to do it, and athletes still compete! I guess I'm more about the glorious competition than sketchy corporate practices.
  • AprecheApreche
    I would also like to see a broadcast that is not US-centric. But you know what? Any country you go to, their TV network is broadcasting in a fashion that is just as nationalistic and crappy as NBC. In some countries, like probably China, I bet it's even worse than ours.
  • RymRym
    The critical moments of most of the sports are consumable in GIF form.
  • Luke BurrageLuke Burrage
    How do you not all watch sports like I do, via dodgy Russian streaming sites? I pick all the sports in many languages (usually a pick of three or four commentaries via different networks) and they never switch away to show the final minutes of a handball match.
  • no fun girlno fun girl
    edited August 2016
    Apreche said:

    I would also like to see a broadcast that is not US-centric. But you know what? Any country you go to, their TV network is broadcasting in a fashion that is just as nationalistic and crappy as NBC. In some countries, like probably China, I bet it's even worse than ours.

    ...
    no fun girl said:

    I would enjoy watching, but I don't really have a source that isn't going to be.. nationalistic.. in its presentation. Then again, what are the olympics (and related media) except an allotted expression of nationalism? Anyone with a more performance centered source, please speak up.

    Apreche said:

    If you can get the NBC live streams to work for the non-televised sports, there basically no commentary. You just watch the sport as if you were a spectator who was very very close to the action.

    Reading.

    Anyway, watching the NBC streams, some dude is talking during the whole thing. I just want to watch some g-d sabre. Oh and cut to the ref more, for them hand signals. AAAnd I could only watch one bout before NBC insisted I sign in with my TV subscription.
    Post edited by no fun girl on
  • ChurbaChurba
    Kate Monster said:

    Starfox said:

    Fair enough. But I suspect money isn't the primary motivator for most, if not nearly every athlete there.

    Primary motivator, no. Actual necessity for some? Yes.
    No joke. To pull out a personal story about it - I remember a number of years ago, discussing with my father and my friend's father over pints how they were going to afford a shark suit so that she could actually stand a reasonable chance of competing, when other people on the same team were making enough cash on sponsorship deals to buy out both our families twice over. And this was at a point where she was already a gold medalist in world competitions, not like she was just some hick from the sticks that nobody had ever heard of.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    Starfox said:

    But nobody is forcing anyone to do it, and athletes still compete!

    Um, some parents do force their children down this path and leave them prepared for little else. Also, in some countries the governments do force more gifted athletes to train and compete.

  • StarfoxStarfox
    Yeah, that's not good. But I would say those are more crazy parents and authoritarian governments problems than Olympics problems.

    (Side note: Churbs, didn't the swimming governing body ban those because of prohibitive cost?)

    Anyways, I think Olympics rock, and would you rather live in a world without them? That's crazy talk to me.
Sign In or Register to comment.