As a follow up to my last entry, I wanted to make two more points regarding the Paralympic Games.
When we talked about 'olympism' in the Olympic Games, it seemed like a consensus that the Olympic Games were polluted with ideals outside those of Olympism. I have even mentioned this in a previous blog about how the ideology of Olympism is great in theory, but is almost nonexistent in practice.
If we look at the Paralympic Games, don't these events bring a better understanding of what olympism is supposed to be? These athletes are coming together to compete at a high level while at the same time they are there for the experience of other nations and to simply compete.
So if I am a member of Team USA and I compete in the Paralympic Games, do I even want to have the same media exposure? Do I want to have the same convoluted relationship that Olympians have with the media and the viewers? If I want to stay closer to the ideals of Olympics, I am not sure that I want to have the same exposure. Paralympic athletes compete now for seemingly the same reasons that that the ancient Olympians did. That is to compete at a high level while at the same time bringing together different cultures. The fact that they are competing is way more important than the winner of the event.
The last point I want to make regarding the Paralympics deals with a complete societal change that needs to take place in order for more exposure to occur. The media is not really at fault for this. As quoted by a coworker of mine and a former newspaper editor, "The job of the media is to pick the stories and write about the stories in which they think their audience wants to know about." In essence, everything the media is feeding the public is exactly what the public wants. If the media didn't do this, then people would not consume the news like they do now because there would be severe disinterest.
In my opinion this is very comparable to another large complaint people have with sports. That complaint is that professional athletes are overpaid. I argue that professional athletes are underpaid in some instances because much of society's disposable income goes to watching and attending sporting events. Michael Jordan made the NBA, the Chicago Bulls, and every arena he visited billions of dollars over his career. So when he was paid $33 million during the 1997-98 season, he was probably being underpaid compared to what he was worth. The same can be said for many athletes. The only reason that pro athletes make the money they do, is because society continues to pay for it. Jordan made that money because people paid to watch him play, paid to wear his shoes, and paid to wear his jersey. Is it his fault? Absolutely not.
Just like society is responsible, yet complains, about overpaid athletes, we are also responsible for the lack of media attention the Paralympics receive although many view that as a travesty.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
First, I question whether journalists are giving people EXACTLY what they want--isn't it a wager as to what people want? The 1999 U.S. Women's World Cup team had very little exposure going into the game, and yet, it was revealed that people did in fact want more coverage. As for newspapers, I believe that evidence shows that the demise of newspapers is imminent, with the increasing reliance on other forms of media, especially the Internet.
ReplyDelete