Olympics | Professor Andy Miah

Beijing Olympics Torch Relay in London

On Thursday afternoon Josh Neicho from Letters at the Evening Standard asked me for a contribution about the torch relay arriving in London. I was waiting for a flight to Barcelona, but cobbled together something for them. Pasted below are the published version and my full submission. All are free for quoting:

Evening Standard published version

“If athletes are thinking of protesting this weekend, as the Olympic flame arrives in London, first they have to decide what they are protesting about – Tibet or wider human rights issues – then, on how their politics square with Olympic values.

There is an argument that the Olympics should be untainted by confrontational politics. In support of this view, one could point to the vast amount of soft diplomacy done at the behest of the Olympic movement: such as the Olympic Truce, which through the UN calls on heads of state to cease conflicts during the competition, or Olympic Solidarity, which enables the participation of many athletes who might not otherwise compete due to financial difficulties or political circumstances.

Athletes are and should be free to express themselves about global issues without intervention from any Olympic authority. They should, however, be cautious about their celebrity being co-opted by well-meaning but aggressive campaigning teams seeking to use them for their own benefit. They should gain inspiration from the quiet protests of Juan Carlos and Tommie Smith in Mexico in 1968; but recall their actions led to their expulsion from the Games.

The arguments used to support demonstrations against the Beijing Olympics, furthermore, might also be advanced by protesters against the 2012 London Games, on account of Britain’s involvement in the Iraq war and attacks on civil liberties during the “war on terror”.

Hypocrisy is rife on this issue, which is why the IOC prefers to portray itself simply as a sporting organization, even though it is clearly more than this.”

Dr Andy Miah, andymiah.net

My full submission

The Olympic torch passing through London this weekend

“If athletes are thinking of protesting this weekend, as the Olympic flame relay arrives on its long route to Beijing, then they have first to decide what it is they are protesting about. The interventions – plural and different – at the lighting ceremony in Olympia two weeks ago were characterized as pro-Tibet protests, yet the Reporters without Borders, while Tibet sympathizers, are predominantly concerned about the freedom of Chinese journalists within the mainland. It was the pro-Tibet protestors in the village of Olympia later that day that made particular reference to Tibet. So, will their protest be about media freedom of local or international journalists, or the various campaigns that have been launched in relation to Darfur, via the ‘Genocide Olympics’ strap line? Alternatively, will the protest be about the people of Tibet and the state of unrest that has been evident?

Their next decision should be about how their politics square with Olympic values. On one view, protest and activism are an integral element of the Olympic ideals, since they can contribute to the achievement of greater intercultural understanding, the core business of Olympism outlined in the Olympic Charter. On another view, the Olympic ideals should be untainted by this sort of confrontational politics, for its potentially destructive potential. Proponents of such views point to the vast amount of soft international diplomacy, which is evident below the surface of the Olympic Movement. For example, the Olympic Truce draws on the IOC’s relationship with the United Nations to call upon Heads of States to cease conflicts during the 16 days of competition. Alternatively, Olympic Solidarity has enable the participation of athletes from a vast number of countries that might otherwise be unable to take part, due to financial difficulties or political circumstances. Consider also the moment that North and South Korea entered the stadium at the Opening Ceremony of Sydney 2000.

The fact remains that in 100 years of modern Olympic history, there has never been a non-politicized Games. Yet, each incarnation has had to ensure that the Games are not too political, so as not to disrupt the entire Olympic programme. It is clear that athletes do not want this and the recent calls to boycott only the opening ceremony by Kate Hoey – a politics that gestures towards issues of political sensitivity – is a sensible route for those with strong views on this subject.

Athletes are and should be free to express themselves about global political issues without intervention from any Olympic authority. They should be cautious about their celebrity status being co-opted by well-meaning, but aggressive campaigning teams who seek to draw on an athlete’s name for their own good, some of which might have sponsorship tie ins that conflict with the Olympic sponsorship programme. They should gain inspiration from the quiet protests of Juan Carlos and Tommie Smith in Mexico 1968, but recall that their actions led to expulsion from the Olympic Games. Perhaps this is not too great a sacrifice for some athletes, but for others, it would be devastating and perhaps limit their capacity to capitalize on their Olympian status for subsequent purposes.

Finally, one might observe that arguments used to support protests of the Beijing Olympics due to China’s political interventions or lack of, might also be used to protest London’s Games in 2012, on account of its maneuvers in foreign policy, the Atlantic Alliance and assaults on human rights that have been justified in the context of a war on terror. In short, if athletes protest China, then they should consider whether they are also willing to protest London and, if not, whether this tells us anything about why protest and the Olympics enjoy a very difficult relationship. Hypocrisy is rife on this issue, which is why the IOC prefer simply to remain single minded about being just a sporting organization even if we know they are not.”

Dr Andy Miah
Reader
University of the West of Scotland

The Beijing Olympics Lighting Ceremony

Some reflections on why the RSF protest in Ancient Olympia took place and whether we can judge it:

It is conceivable that the RSF regard the presence of Chinese authorities in Olympia as a violation of that sacred space. So, in their view it is already a polluted space and their intervention cannot diminish any further what is already a violent assault on the Olympic ideals. Indeed, from this perspective, their protest constitutes a necessary counter-balance to restore the spirit of the Olympic ideals. I note that their protest might have been very different – it could have involved physical violence towards an individual. Instead, it was an act that aimed strictly to gain a presence within a television camera frame and I put it to you that it is this space, rather than Olympia, that they were invading. It also took place during speeches, rather than the lighting ceremony. These are relevant details that should inform our judgment of the specifics of their act.

Equally, the politics of sacred space needs further unraveling here. On what basis should we conclude that Olympia is a sacred space, rather than a space that is historically valued by certain communities? The live broadcast on BBC News 24 (in which I saw Roy!) had commentators speaking throughout the Priestesses performance and, typically, commentators are silent during sacred ceremonies. Also, the priestesses are actresses so, while this should not diminish the value of the proceedings to us, we might not claim it has the gravity of a religious ceremony, for instance.

Additionally, to suggest that what has been achieved by the IOC’s negotiations with China is satisfactory does not stand. The RSF’s work on China extends well before the Olympics were planned for Beijing and if one looks at their campaigns, most of what they discuss aims clearly to utilize the Olympics as a mechanism for their own campaigns. They trade on the idea that many people care about the Olympics and their utilization of it is necessarily aggressive. Incidentally, their protest was pro-Tibet – especially as foreign journalists were required to leave there recently (now being let back it seems) – but not wholly about Tibet. It seems to me that the bulk of the RSF campaign is about DOMESTIC journalist freedom in mainland China.

Here in the UK, I feel that the intervention by the RSF has set the frame for the entire commentary about the Beijing Olympics. Moreover, I don’t think this should trouble us or China greatly. Great Games should be about more than just the results of competition and a trouble free undertaking. However, in pursuing this aspiration, we must engage with the educative process of conflict negotiations. For me, this is the Olympic spirit.

Where is the evidence to support the claim that what the IOC has achieved with media freedom in China is sufficient to allow journalists to undertake their work? My feeling from journalists is that these freedoms to travel and so on are all perfectly fine providing you do not wish to undertake anything that is too critical of the state and I hardly think this is likely to be a satisfactory state of affairs for any journalist. Also, to the extent that the IOC has concerned itself predominantly with the freedom of Olympic journalists ie those that are reporting sports events, this hardly consists of a broad opening up of China to Western media.

If our claim is that the IOC has enabled the door to open, then this certainly has merit, but if what we see is appalling, that merit has limited currency. Moreover, to the extent that the invasion of sacred space has the greatest impact on people’s sensibilities, then I see the methods and target of the RSF protestors as completely logical. It is the disruption of ceremony that provides the symbolic impact that protestors seek. We must also recognize that all aspects of the flame relay are concurrently symbolic to certain audiences and underpinned by significant commercial sponsorship. This fact hardly coheres with the view that this journey is strictly, spiritually pure.

I appreciate the long view of international diplomacy, but there are many who believe that the open door to china could shut just as quickly after the closing ceremony and, for them, this is why it is necessary to exert as much pressure now. I also see the acts of organizations as the RSF as constitutive of international diplomatic efforts, in the same way that we might talk of Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth. On this basis, I think we are too close to this situation to adequately judge its long term implications. For now, my eyes and ears in Greece and China tell me that, for the first time in history, journalists were not permitted into the Acropolis for the torch arrival and that Tiananmen Square was also severely restricted in the last few days.

Finally, let’s remember that China’s new ‘Olympic’ legislation for foreign media, which began in January 2007, ends in November 2008.

I appreciate these are sensitive issues, but I think this is why we need to pursue different points of view in order to come to terms with what is happening.

Journalists at the Beijing 2008 Olympics

In an attempt to start assembling journalists that will be in Beijing, I’ve put together a Facebook group to share impressions, understanding and knowledge about orientation. If you’re going and you’re covering the Games as a journalist, please join the group:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=10776325266&ref=mf

Olympic Legacies (Oxford 29-30 March, 2008)

Olympic Legacies

29-30 March 2008

St Antony’s College, Oxford

Sponsored by

St Antony’s College, Oxford

La Trobe University, Melbourne

Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group

As London prepares to host the 2012 Olympic Games, the conference brings together leading international social scientists and practitioners to reflect on the critical theme of ‘Olympic Legacies’. The conference’s purpose is to enrich our understanding of not only the Olympic movement but also the relationship between sport and modern societies.

There is no registration fee for delegates but registration is mandatory.

For registration and further information please contact:

Jennifer Griffiths, Asian Studies Centre, St Antony’s College, 62 Woodstock Rd, Oxford OX2 6JF

tel: (01865) 274559 fax: (01865) 274559 email: jennifer.griffiths@sant.ox.ac.uk

Conference organisers: Boria Majumdar (cristorian@yahoo.com) and Jonathan Manley (jonathan.manley@tandf.co.uk)

Linford Christie in London 2012 Torch Relay

A couple of weeks ago, an editor at the Evening Standard asked me to write a letter in relation to the Standard’s campaign to have Linford Christie removed from the Olympic torch relay nominations. I think he expected a letter in support of their campaign. He didn’t get it. Here’s what they didn’t publish. I didn’t hear back from him after sending it:

Dear Josh, I submit the following. It probably isn’t what you expected or, perhaps, wanted….

Dear Editor,

The campaign to remove Linford Christie from the Olympic torch relay for Beijing in London later this year highlights one of the longstanding inconsistencies within the Olympic Movement. As an aspiring judicial system – with its own Court to boot – it fails miserably as a mechanism of rehabilitation, since no amount of recompense an athlete makes after a doping infraction is enough to allow them entry back into the social world of athletics. While it might appear to be bad PR to bring Linford into the ceremony, this fact invites further questions over why such a decision was taken. In part, the answer lies in recent years when Linford became a mentor for the British Olympic team. At the same time, he was also a witness for a pioneering British inquiry into developing more robust policies to address doping in sport, especially taking into account claims from athletes, like him, who say that they have ingested banned substances by poorly labeled nutritional supplements. When we see Linford with the torch in April, we should not look upon him as a villain who has been celebrated despite his infractions – not as a bad guy who finished first - but as a symbol of rehabilitation, someone from whom greater achievements are possible by learning the hard way. Much better for London to do this than to utilize a clean athlete who has yet to be found guilty of doping. At least with Linford, we all know where we stand. There can be no subsequent betrayal, which could occur if any, supposedly, clean athlete is asked to perform such duties. London should be different and it is right that the IOC does not intervene on these matters. While it might appear to be consistent with the moral outrage that surrounds doping in sport to request Linford’s absence, it is thoroughly inconsistent with the aspirations of achieving justice, which are the deeper values at stake when we appeal to fair play as a guiding norm within competitive performance cultures like sport. So, I say let him carry the torch. His permanent exclusion from the BOA as an athlete is mandatory under its policy, not a definitive statement on his present character. Perhaps his presence will encourage a deeper level of debate about what doping means, why it matters and how we should deal with it. However, any such inquiry is lost if we limit our conversations to the simplistic signifier of Linford Christie as doped athlete.

Dr Andy Miah,
Author of ‘Genetically Modified Athletes’
Reader, University of the West of Scotland.

Blogging in Beijing

A couple of days ago, I interviewed for ABC Radio on the recent discussions about blogging at the Beijing Olympics. Here’s the transcript:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/sportsfactor/stories/2008/2179195.htm

Scholars for Olympia

The pilgrimage to Olympia after the summer fires in Greece was a very special occasion. It was far more severe than could have been imagined, but also quite poigniant to see the monuments remaining strong.

Scholars for Olympia (Athens/Olympia, 24-25 Nov, 2007)

After the fires in Greece this year, an event has been created to support the village of Olympia on its road to recovery.

http://www.scholars-for-olympia.com/

2004 August: Olympic Construction Workers deaths

This photograph is from the north part of Syntagama Square in Athens, just next to the Zappeion Hall, which, at the time, was functioning as the non-accredited Olympic media centre. This peaceful manifestation sought to raise awareness about the lives that were lost in the construction of Olympic venues.

As many people know, the Athens venues were under pressure to complete on time and the claim was that the rush to do this was neglectful of adequate safety measures. As a consequence, the sentiment here was that the lives were lost because of this pressure and, indirectly, because of the Olympics. The crosses here symbolize each life that was lost.

I have the impression that this coverage did not reach mainstream audiences. Here, everything was peaceful and reminded me of the value of such opportunities to express controversial positions during an Olympic Games. How can the Olympics aspire to remaining apolitical – as it describes itself – while functioning as a mechanism of important social expression?

New PhD student, Ana Adi

This week, I will begin working with a new PhD student, Ana Adi, who comes to Scotland from Romania. Ana will be working on media, cultural and political aspects of the Beijing Games. Ana will work closely with Culture @ the Olympics and I am delighted that she is now here with us in Scotland. Here is her biography:

Ana Adi, BA MA (Bucharest), MA (Missouri)
Ana Adi is a doctoral researcher in the School of Media, Language and Music at the University of Paisley (University of West of Scotland). Ana comes to the University after completing a Fulbright scholarship at the Missouri School of Journalism of the University of Missouri-Columbia where her dissertation was on emotional engagement with online news video releases. Ana has worked as a PR Executive for various agencies and organisations such as Mojo AD in the United States and McCann PR in Romania. She also has extensive experience as a radio producer.

An expert in Public Relations, Ana’s background is in Political and Administrative Studies and Strategic Communication. Ana’s PhD investigates the role of new media structures and public relations in China, as they relate to the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. Ana is a Staff Writer for Culture at the Olympics: Issues, Trends and Perspectives. Ana is a true polyglot, fluent in English, Spanish, French and competent in German, Dutch and Italian, along with her mother tongue, Romanian.