The ratings of the Olympic Games the past few years have been dismal. Things finally took a change for the better last summer. NBC’s coverage of the Olympic Games was seen by many Americans and NBC was happy with the results. Much of the ratings success is of course due in part to Michael Phelps and his race for gold. This fact also meant that NBC had to air a lot of swimming. Almost every time I turned to NBC last August it had coverage of either swimming, diving, track or volleyball. One time I saw badminton but that was when I turned on MSNB at 4 0 clock in the morning because I was having trouble sleeping. This got me thinking is this how all the networks air the footage of the Olympics to their country? Are populations around the world subjected to the same four sports over and over again? Apparently not.
Just over the boarder Canada has an entirely different way of covering the Olympics. In this article the author states why the Canadian’s coverage is much better than the US’s coverage:
http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2008/08/if-olympics-cov.html
The article notes not only does CBC cover a more wide range of sports, but it is also better because it gives better analysis, is more in-depth, and is less dramatic. What do you think of this year’s coverage of the Olympic Games? Do you think NBC did a good job with its coverage? Or do you think the format should be more like Canada’s? Is NBC right to put some sports on lesser channels?
The text states, “When viewers tune in to the Olympic Game, they are certainly addressed as biased observers. It is assumed that they wish to see representatives of their nation at work, but it is also believed that they wish to see a more transcendent excellence-that they want to watch the best”(Rowe 128). Do you think NBC is just showing us what we want to see? Do you wish they showed more and if so what other sports would you like to see?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Rowe, McKay and Miller make some good points about the nationalism of sport and television’s stake in it, in their article Come Together; Sport, Nationalism, and the Media Image. They speak about the desire of commentators to outline the “hero” aspect of sport since it is one of the few places to do so, especially in the Olympic games. Although it is less necessary to provide “thick description” within TV commentary because, unlike radio, pictures on screen aid it, I think it is still nice to have some sort of narrative accompanying a sport (Rowe 129). The problem lies in how much “narrative” to divulge without taking away from the essence of the sport itself.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Philip Michael’s analysis of NBC’s coverage in his article, “If Olympics coverage were a sport, we’d give Canada the gold; would NBC even medal?,” especially the part about Daggett’s commentary on the gymnastics competition. Being that I am not too familiar with the sport, I would also appreciate an explanation as to “why certain landings were scored certain ways,” instead of what he felt was an incredible or unworthy dismount (Michaels 2).
I think the United States should take a page out of Canada’s book and offer not only more variety of sports coverage, but provide more in-depth coverage and less of what Michaels refers to as “mawkiness.” I can only watch so many features about the competitors before I start to get aggravated… I’m tuning in to watch them perform, so get on with it! I know that everyone has a story and that the Olympic games is a perfect platform to share that story, but Michaels is right, the United States dwells on the inconsequential way too much.
Yes it is probably true that NBC is appealing to the masses when they air the “fantastic four” sports: Swimming, Diving, Track, and Gymnastics. I love having the option to watch these sports, but not at the expense of all of the others, all of the time. I am a big fan of beach volleyball and tennis, and I was forced to watch the majority of these games during the day. Other sports I caught during the day were waterpolo and rowing (both pretty exciting… but who tuned in?) which were given horrible time slots. I found it odd that there were four different cycling categories: BMX, Mountain Bike, Road, and Track, and I saw none of them. I also didn’t see shooting, which I didn’t even know was an Olympic sport (no wonder people want to keep their right to bear arms… they can get a medal for it!).
This could be attributed to Michael Phelps’ dominance in swimming which was the topic of conversation almost anywhere in the States at the time. We want to watch our nation’s “heroes” succeed, and so it is understandable that during the Beijing Olympics, Phelps also dominated the coverage. But when we are seeing features about Michael’s mom cheering in the stands, that is where I draw the line (Michaels 1). All of that “filler time” could have been used to air another sport.
I do wish that NBC had aired more sports, but I understand that they have to appeal to the masses. The Olympic games, like any other massive industry, is still about ratings and making money. If only a small percentage of NBC’s followers will watch Judo or Taekwondo, what good will it do them to air it? If someone else is willing to air the “major sports” viewers will turn to them. It’s just business.
-Alison