|
Olympic ideals take another hit |
|
|
|
Written by Lethbridge Herald
|
|
Wednesday, January 28 2009, 3:36 PM |
One of the goals of the Olympic movement, according to the International Olympic Committee’s website, is to “contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind.”
That is closely in line with the aims of Right to Play, an international humanitarian organization which uses sport as part of its efforts to improve health, foster peace and develop life skills for children in some of the world’s poorest countries.
Right to Play has, in past Olympics, set up shop at Olympic venues, where the exposure has helped it attract athletes such as Canadian women’s hockey star Hayley Wickenheiser to its humanitarian endeavours.
The group won’t be welcome at the 2010 Vancouver Winter Games, however — or at the 2012 Summer Olympics in London, England, or the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia.
Right to Play’s crime?
Associating with a sponsor that is in competition with one the IOC has lined up for the Olympics.
Officially, IOC says it continues to support Right to Play’s activities but has decided to support its own similar programs. But clearly, it boils down to sponsorship. Canadian IOC member Dick Pound defended the Olympic organization’s decision, noting in a story from The Canadian Press, “When you raise a lot of money from people who support your exercise, you can’t have them ambushed by somebody else.”
Pound went on to say Johann Koss, the four-time gold medal-winning speedskater from Norway who founded and heads Right to Play, “understands he’s got to raise money from sponsors and the IOC has to raise money from sponsors. . . When it’s the Olympic Games, and during the Olympic Games, the IOC position has to trump it.”
Apparently protecting sponsors also trumps the Olympic ideal.
There’s no question sponsorship is important for the Olympics to exist. But the IOC’s decision just seems to be the latest indication of how far the Olympics has moved from being an international celebration of amateur sport and all of the encompassing ideals such as physical activity and sportsmanship.
Today, the Olympic “ideal” seems to be all about its role as a gigantic marketing machine. And even with all the corporate sponsorship money, Canadian taxpayers will still be footing a sizable portion of the bill to host the Vancouver Games.
Supporters of Right to Play are confident the organization won’t be seriously harmed by its banishment from the Olympics. Wickenheiser noted Right to Play “has enough exposure that it can stand on its own merit and will still be fully supported by the athletes of the world. . .”
Ironically, Right to Play seems to more closely embody the sort of values the Olympics at its finest used to spotlight.
Somewhere along the way, the IOC has lost sight of those values.
|
