Introduction

1Sports are often seen as an integrating force in society, with peaceful competition that brings athletes as well as spectators together to enjoy the accomplishments – the strength, the beauty and intelligence of the human body and mind. Athletes from different countries come together and get to know each other, as do the attending spectators who interact with each other in a festive environment. For many athletes and spectators sports are what make life worth living. Some writers, especially American, characterize sports as a kind of religion (cf. Price 2001).

2Every second year the Olympic flame is kindled somewhere in the world and people from all continents direct their attention to the Games, cheering their favorites and watching their competitors performing in a spectacular environment provided by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the hosting county. Sport has the ability to engage. Some sporting events attract tens of thousands of spectators in attendance and millions of television viewers.

3In media research, certain sporting events have been regarded mainly from the point of view of integration. ‘Media events’ – including major sporting events like the Super Bowl in the United States, the World Cup of football, or the Olympics – are broadcast on a large scale that attracts millions of viewers who ‘participate’ in the event, though at a distance. Of course the events are televised in a manner that people who watch the competition in their living room, in a neighboring bar or on big screens set up for the occasion will feel that they have a ‘virtual presence’ at the competition. They will often be regarded as the “first spectator” (Larson & Park 1993 : 57). According to media-event theory as defined by Daniel Dayan and Elihu Katz (1992), we can regard these sports broadcasts, like the broadcasts of the moon landing, the funeral of John F. Kennedy and Diana, and the royal weddings, as a special genre of television programmes. They argue that “these broadcasts integrate societies in a collective heartbeat and evoke a renewal of loyalty to the society and its legitimate authority” (1992 : 9). Not only active participants but also viewers of Olympic Games thus adhere to the values expressed in the activities : equality (everybody has the same chances), competition (the best will win), peace (playing according to predetermined rules), and genuineness or authenticity (no doping).

4The integrative function that is inherent in the media-event concept has been criticized for being too much concerned with ritual and having too little focus on conflicts (Couldry 2003 ; Cottle 2008). Conflict is, after all, also present in these situations : unhealthy rivalry between supporters, hooliganism, doping of athletes, racism, and so on, are an integral part of sports. In the introduction of a recent edited volume on media events, Hepp and Couldry argue that “the ‘integrative’ moment of media events is, instead of being something that may be assumed in advance as characteristic, something uncertain that must be investigated from one case to another” (2010 : 12). They define a media event as : “certain situated, thickened, centering performances of mediated communication that are focused on a specific thematic core, cross different media products and reach a wide and diverse multiplicity of audiences and participants” (2012 : 12). It is clear that the Olympics comply with this definition. As it is not limited to television as was Dayan and Katz’ definition, it is easier to include in the analysis the coverage in other media before, during and after the Games.

5In the following I want to have a look at the combination of integrative and conflicting elements that are involved in media coverage surrounding the Olympics. My point of departure is that the media mediate and contribute to different discourses that are present in society, of which some are on-going, some recurrent, while others are temporary. The Olympics are examples of thickened mediated communication that is focused on a specific thematic core and they cross different media platforms that reach a wide and diverse multiplicity of audiences and participants. But the discourses also vary in space and time ; some are relevant (and mediated) locally, others are national or international and they also change character over time. In addition, different media platforms are more salient in certain periods – for example, during the preparatory period newspapers and online news are more prominent, while television is most important during the competitions.

6I shall look at conflict and integration, and for both it is important to specify who is involved. What conflicts are reported and to what extend are they spread ? We must also ask what genres promote integration and who is integrated. The discourses that surround the Games may be quite different for different actors, say, between different countries. My main example will be the 1994 Winter Olympic Games that were held in the town where I live, Lillehammer. In addition I shall refer to some other examples, especially in the end where I want to share some thoughts about participation and the use of new media, including social media, in connection with the Olympics.

Olympics

7The Olympic Games differ from other international sports competitions in several ways. First of all the IOC owns the Games, which are embedded in a specific ideology, namely, Olympism. According to the Olympic Charter : Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example, social responsibility and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles. The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity. (Olympic Charter 2011 : 10).

8This specific ideology not only becomes apparent during the competitions, but also shows itself in other activities of the IOC during the Olympic Games and in the Olympiads between them. The opening and closing ceremonies, for example, include many symbols that express the ideals of a peaceful society and harmonious development. Compared with other major sporting events the Olympics are also different as they encompass not one but a series of sports. By combining many sporting disciplines, the Olympics are interesting for people from different countries who can find their own popular ‘national’ sports and their participants during the Games. Of course this is also the reason why the Winter Games are smaller, since in many countries there is little interest in sports played on snow or ice for obvious reasons.

9What the Olympic Games have in common with other major sporting events is that the event is arranged in a new place every time. Every second year a new city arranges the Olympic Games (Winter and Summer alternately). As the Olympic Games are always on the move, each new Game is organized as a giant project. This way of organizing the successive Games has several consequences. It enables different cities and countries to host the Games and to use the occasion not only to join the exclusive list of Olympic cities, but also to use the event to promote themselves (cf. Moragas et al. 1995, Klausen 1999). Using the Games for promotional reasons seems to be increasingly important, but it also involves questions of how countries, cities or regions are represented internationally. This may easily generate discussions within the country or city about what (and whose) image is to be promoted. Each Olympic Game is a new event that is organized as a project ; a temporary organization is established along with fixed goals that lead to the arrangement of a successful Games. It involves new investments, the building of venues, transportation and accommodations in different locations. From the point of view of the city involved it may be part of upgrading their transportation system, housing schemes, and so on, but they may also oppose existing interests. Conflicts rising from this situation will often be expressed in public though the news media.

10In the following I shall show some examples of the kinds of public discussions that took place in the media during the planning period – both in Lillehammer and some of the recent Summer Games e.g. London – but I also want to underline that not all media gave the same impressions.

Media and the Olympics

11It is all too easy to talk about ‘the media’ in connection to the Olympics. Olympic themes and issues are dealt with in a number of media or, as we might call it today, media platforms. They cover a range of aspects and are geographically spread from the local to the global level.

12Different media : All traditional and new media carry content about certain aspects of the Olympics : books, newspapers, television, magazines, radio, the Internet, social media, all communicate content pertaining to the Games. Still, their content, their scale and their audiences are different – you will not find the same Olympic content in books as in newspapers or on Facebook. Below I shall concentrate on the traditional mass media, in particular television, but at the end of this article I shall extend my focus to the new forms in which Olympic content is conveyed.

13Different genres : Not only does Olympic content vary from one medium to another, but even within the same medium there are differences : the articles in the sports sections of newspapers treat Olympics issues differently from those in the news or the feature sections. In the case of television, Gary Whannel has characterized sports as being in the middle of a triangle with journalistic/news media, entertainment, and fiction drama at its corners (Whannel 1992). In fact, when we consider different programmes that are about different aspects of sport, we find a combination of different genres – sports issues are covered in news programmes, in live transmissions of sporting events, talk shows about sports and athletes, and athletes are regular guests on entertainment shows.

14Different producers : During the Olympics the official Olympic broadcaster produces the ‘international feed’ for the different national broadcasters, consisting mostly of live visual coverage of ceremonies, competitions, medal ceremonies, with background sound, but without commentary. Except for the US television-rights holder, the individual broadcasters are not allowed to cover of the competitions themselves, but they are allowed to add their own commentary and national ‘coloring’ (interviews with national participants, shots of prominent spectators, reports outside the venues, etc.). This may result in quite different kinds of mediation between countries, even though the same event is covered (Moragas et al. 1995, Puijk 1997a, 1999).

15Media coverage of the Olympics is of course more than just the television broadcasts during the few weeks each Games lasts. The preparation period and the aftermath are also subject of reporting and discussion in the media, and these result in a host of discourses – on the planning, the budgets, the venues, the symbols, political issues, sometimes boycotts, who is qualified to contribute, doping, security, and more in addition to the coverage of the ceremonies and the competitions. One of the arguments I want to put forward is that different media cover the Olympics differently over time – changing the balance between conflict and integration. Let me start with the period preceding the Games, the period of planning and building.

Coverage during the build-up

16Before the arrangement of an Olympic Games, a long period of planning, bidding and building-up has taken place. The media coverage during this phase differs from situation to situation. Of course, more media coverage and public discussion can be expected in Western democratic societies with a free press than in more totalitarian states where questions of budgets and image-making are in the hands of the state and not discussed in the media.

17Despite its image of being built on an ancient Hellenic tradition and positive values, and the rhetorical use of terms that connote grassroots and close relations (Olympic movement, Olympic family, etc.), the Olympic movement is deeply integrated with what we may call dominant modern, capitalist institutions, and they are part of what has been labeled the media-sports complex (Jhally 1989, Helland 2007) involving professional sporting clubs and federations, media (especially television) and large companies through its programmes of sponsorship.

18This implies that the IOC is constantly involved in a wide range of discourses – on the commercialization of sports, mass versus elite sports, discussions about human rights and political alliances, about the choice of Olympic cities, and so on. For each new Olympic Games the general discussions and those specific to the Games at hand will blend, in particular in the local and national media of the arranging country. Still, even in democratic countries many elements of these discussions remain hidden from the international public as they appear mostly in the local – and sometimes national – media.

Costs

19Two important issues in the local discussions are the costs and the local consequences. We all know of the mechanisms that are set into action when bidding processes on the one hand demand that the budget is kept as low as possible to obtain state guarantees and popular support, and on the other hand external forces are allowed to set standards. In case of the Olympics both IOC and the international sports federations are allowed to demand sporting conditions that are equal to, and often better than, those in the best-equipped venues in the world. From the outside it seems to be a strange situation that those who decide – the sports federations with explicit interests in asking for the best solutions for their sports – are at variance with the ones that have to take on the financial responsibility. Of course there are limits to what the sports organizations can – and do – ask for, but it may be an important factor in determining the costs of the venues and installations that have to be built or upgraded. As this applies for every single sport represented in the Games, the accumulated consequences can be quite big. In addition there can be other sources of budgetary overruns, like unforeseen expenses (in Lillehammer costs of arrangement were far beyond the budget, Lesjø 2003) or increased security costs (as in London).

Social issues

20New building and infrastructural projects often raise protests from vested interests. For instance, in Vancouver it was argued that cheap housing was demolished to give way to Olympic venues. Conflicts about venues may not only concern the demolition of existing structures. In the Lillehammer case it was just the contrary – the different municipalities fought to have the venues within their boundaries. But the building of venues also raised other discussions and conflicts : ecological concerns were voiced and the use of materials (e.g. Norwegian or imported wood) was discussed mainly at the regional but also at the national level.

21The situation for the indigenous population has been an issue both in the Sydney Games in 2000 and in the Vancouver Winter Games in 2010. According to Richard Cashman, “The issue of Australia’s indigenous communities was a sensitive political issue for the local Olympic organizers” (2006 : 222). The issue was of course not new but part of an on-going discourse, but fear of protests and disturbances from the aboriginal population were seen as a threat. The Games coincided with a critical point in the relations between the aborigines and the government, with Prime Minister Howard’s refusal to apologize to “the stolen generation” of aborigines.

22In other Games the question of indigenous rights and culture has also led to conflicts. During the preparatory period of the Vancouver Winter Games in 2010 local groups voiced the issue of indigenous rights. According to O’Bonsawin the “Olympic Resistance Network” launched an anti-Olympic campaign under the title “No Olympics on stolen native land”. They argued that the territories in British Columbia where the Games were to be held were unceded and non-surrendered indigenous territories and that the government did not have the right to ‘develop’ this land (O’Bonsawin 2010). Mediation of these questions is often restricted to regional and national media, while indigenous culture has been represented in a less conflictual way during the ceremonies.

23The financial and social consequences can be seen as belonging to the local level. The costs of the Games are normally reported internationally, but the figures are often difficult to compare. The social consequences are far less reported on internationally, and these issues remain often internal or might turn up in feature reports in selected foreign media.

Representing the host

24As the Olympic Games provide the host city or country with an opportunity to conduct public relations on a world scale, much effort is normally put into creating a coherent local or national (in some cases like the Barcelona Olympics a regional) image. Of course the central symbols of the Games – the design programme for the logo, mascots, torch and the ceremonies – are widely spread through national and international media. But the foregoing struggles on representation are often more hidden. Let me give you an example from the Lillehammer Winter Games.

25The mascot for the Lillehammer Games first turned up in a flyer that was used in the bidding process. The son of the Mexican architect and IOC member Pedro Ramínez Vázques, who was the president of the Mexico Games in 1968, designed “Håkon”. In Norway this design was criticized in a trade paper for the media (Kampanje) for being a Disney character that was far from expressing anything Norwegian. These criticisms eventually resulted in a new design with the mascots Håkon and Kristin in a Norwegian style, symbolizing Norwegian values, including equal gender relations (Klausen 1997).

26This design programme – pictograms inspired by rock paintings, colors as found in Norwegian nature and the use of building materials according to Norwegian traditions – gained widespread approval, not at least because it avoided stereotypes of Vikings and “moose in the sunset”.

27Another case of intense conflict was the diplomatic strains between Norway and Greece in connection with the use of the Olympic flame in 1993- 94. The Hellenic Olympic Committee deeply resented the fact that a second Olympic flame was kindled in Morgedal, Norway, and was to be mingled with the one kindled in Olympia, Greece (Klausen 1997). Here the discourse was important in the organizing country, but not mediated very much to other countries.

London 2012 in the Norwegian media

28In London 2012 the controversy about the logo was not a question of national actors resenting the way the country was presented, but rather a question of foreign – that is, Iranian – actors interpreting the symbol in a specific way. In fact this was an international diplomatic issue between Great Brittan and Iran, but still it was not reported very much in the Norwegian press. Using Retriever, which covers more than 100 newspapers, I only found three minor notes of this issue in the Norwegian newspapers.

29An overview over the issues (excluding those about participating athletes) covered by the Norwegian public service broadcaster (NRK) on its online sports and news pages shows the same tendency (table 1). The table shows that there were several articles about the candidate cities and London’s victory in 2005. The issue of the Games being held during Ramadan generated coverage in 2006. The cost of the Games was the only issue that sustained a consistent presence over time, while other critical issues were represented in one or a few articles. In addition, some of the reports about the venues and ticket sales gave off rather a positive impression.

Olympics as catalyst of discontent

30The sheer size of the media coverage of the Olympic Games makes them interesting for a range of actors. The organizing country, the sponsors and the athletes all want to be associated with the positive aspects of the Games. However, other actors may have an interest in using the massive media coverage to promote messages that are not necessarily related to the organization of the particular Games but use the media attention to raise specific issues.

31One example is the protests connected to the torch relay. Until 2008 the torch relay consisted of an international and a domestic part within the organizing country. Their main functions are to raise international awareness and domestic enthusiasm and solidarity for the upcoming Games. The media coverage of the torch relay varies but as the torch passes through different international capitals, the media in these countries pay attention – as do people who are motivated to protest. Of course this happened when the torch was carried through the streets of Paris, New York and London on its way to Beijing in 2008. Protests against China’s treatment of the people in Tibet and record of human-rights violations were the main focus.

32The passing of the torch provided the protesters with an opportune place and time : they did not have to travel to China (where they probably would not have been allowed to enter), and they profited from the media attention by being heard nationally. As conflict makes for good news stories, these protests were widely reported internationally too (cf. Papa 2010, Panagiotopoulou, 2010).

33In this case the Olympics were not the target of these protests, but the general awareness and media attention of the Games was used to convey a democratic and human-rights message. In many ways one can say that the Olympic Games were not the reason but the opportunity for these protests. As a result of the incidents with the torch for Beijing Games the IOC has since forbidden the relaying of the torch outside the organizing county. But there is no guarantee that some groups or individuals might use the vast potential of this level of media attention in the future. The terrorist attack in Munich in 1972 is a frightening example. This is of course one of the concerns connected to arranging the Games and a reason why security measures are prioritized.

Development of negative and positive reporting before the Games

34As mentioned before, the Olympics are covered using different genres. Much of the coverage of the preparations of each Games is done in the form of news, either articles in newspapers, online news or news programmes on television. We know that news media have a tendency to emphasis conflict, criticism and debate. This is part of their societal role. It varies from case to case whether this period is characterized by conflict. In some countries the discussions are held behind closed doors and are not publicly exposed. The visibility of the discussions is often limited, and the international media only circulate a few items widely (e.g. whether the Greek would finish constructions before the start of the 2004 Athens Games, the rising costs of London 2012).

35Even though the first phase of the preparatory process in Lillehammer was characterized by conflicts, criticisms and discussions, at the end of the period one could also begin to notice another, more positive attitude towards the upcoming Games. One reason is that some of the critical issues had in fact been settled. In addition reporting on finished venues, their official opening and notes in the newspapers about which athletes have qualified for participation all contributed to a positive mood, one of anticipation, of waiting for something interesting to happen.

36We may note that this optimism was covered not in the news sections, but mainly in the feature and sports sections, in the trade and tourist magazines, and in the entertainment programmes on television. The reporting of the torch relay in the Norwegian media was also positive (Klausen et al. 1995). Several authors have pointed out that the torch relay, in particular the “tour of the nation”, is important in raising local enthusiasm. It is the main activity that people from all over the country can engage in. The reporting in Norway, including on the national television channel, the NRK, was not critical. It was produced by the regional NRK offices, which saw their role as being more as a promoter of their respective region than of being a critical voice (Klausen et al. 1995 : 214-16).

37In the 1994 case we can clearly see a change in opinion during the preparatory years. An opinion poll we held in the Lillehammer region in the years preceding the Games shows that the male population had been in favor for all the time. The changes in attitude that took place were foremost among the women : they became increasingly positive as the Games approached.1 One major reason for this change was probably the fact that many of the predicted negative social consequences (related to construction, prostitution, drugs, etc.) did not occur.

38Over time there exists what can be called a “sports-performing discourse”, a running discourse where individual athletes enter when they perform at an elite level and disappear when they retire from sports. With every major tournament there is a thickening and centring of this discourse. But during the build-up period of an Olympic Games several discourses are also mediated with a varied level of geographic scale. Some of these discourses are closed as the constructions and preparations fall into place, while others continue both during and after the Games. Moreover, different media genres are involved, with news reporting containing critical discussions while magazines and entertainment shows often providing more positive images. During the last phase of the build-up period the sports-performing discourse intensifies with reports on who will participate, their ambitions and speculations about their chances, and this increases the expectations and suspense for both performers and spectators.

Media coverage during the Olympics

39The character of the media coverage changes once the opening ceremonies start. The opening and closing ceremonies demarcate a special time. The Games unfold and – at least for people in the local organizing committee, the athletes, the officials, the television crews, the sports journalists, the spectators in place as well as the local population – what everyone has waited and prepared for is happening. From now on the ceremonies and coverage of the competitions are in focus. This does not mean that the media do not raise other themes. Especially when the media reporters and journalists have bad experiences (with services, transportation, price level, etc.) reports about bad organization are produced (e.g., Atlanta, see Rivenburgh 2008). In Beijing there were also critical discussions about the “fake” fireworks during the opening ceremonies, along with sporadic reports about human rights in China or the demolition of hutongs in Beijing. But these critical voices mostly draw in the massive live coverage of the ceremonies and competitions.

Ceremonies

40The opening ceremonies may be considered a television genre in itself – a two-hour live show with certain obligatory ritual elements. They are truly the only global ritual that has worldwide attention (Mac Aloon 1996, Real 1983). It is a live performance in an arena with spectators in attendance but it is very much facilitated for television. The broadcasts are of course produced to give these viewers the best possible experience and a feeling of being there during the event.

41The Olympic opening (and closing) ceremonies reach amazing numbers of television viewers. The Nielsen marketing research company made the following conclusion after the Beijing Games : More than two billion people – almost one-third of the world’s population – watched the 2008 Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony on Friday, August 8, Nielsen reported Thursday. Nielsen’s estimates are based on television audience data collected from 38 key markets throughout the world, including host nation China, the U.S., Brazil, South Africa, Italy, and Australia. The Asia-Pacific region had the highest audience reach, with more than five in 10 people watching the opening ceremony. Europe and North America followed with 30 % and 24 % reach, respectively. Within Asia-Pacific, China had the highest percentage of people tuning into the opening ceremony. South Korea (44 % of people), Greece (43 % of people), and Australia – all former Summer Olympics host nations – also had high viewership percentages. Viewing levels were also impressive in the U.S., where an estimated that 65 million people watched the opening ceremony. (Nielsenwire, 2008)

42During the opening and closing ceremonies viewers from around the world have an opportunity to have a sense of identification and global integration. Every ceremony contains a number of integrative symbols, including the parade of nations where everyone can identify with a team, the Olympic flag and flame, or the release of doves. In addition to the IOC one other actor has a prominent position during the ceremonies – the host country. They can promote themselves by showing their history and place in the world. Issues from the planning period may reappear in a dramatized way during the ceremonies. For instance, the questions of aboriginal claims in Sydney and Vancouver were symbolically dealt with during the ceremonies.

43The opening and closing ceremonies are rituals that delimit the Olympics – in between they create a special ‘space’, where normal rules are temporarily suspended. This is certainly true for the athletes, the spectators in attendance and the people living in the area. They may be absorbed in the festival and experience a feeling of unity, integration and ‘communitas’ (Turner 1969). The question remains, however, whether television viewers have the same experiences. Olympic broadcasts “mash up” the regular television schedules and people may watch at irregular hours, but it is an open question whether one can apply the same theory on “participation at a distance” (through television at home).

44Mac Aloon (1984) has categorized the televised Olympics as spectacles – in particular ever since television has become the major medium of mediation of the games. He differentiates spectacle as a performance type from ritual, game and festival, which are frames that are also present in the Olympics but are in a way nested inside the spectacle. The spectacle is characterized by distance between the participants and the spectators and by ‘awe’ as dominant metaphor for perception.

45By prescribing only watching, leaving the rest to the dialogue between the observer and the “sights,” spectacle accommodates the optionality and individual choice, which are widespread modern values. (...) The spectacle frame implies more than distance and optionality. It specifies doubt, skepticism, reflexivity, moral ambiguity and ambivalence as well. (Mac Aloon 1984 : 269-70)

46The question is whether television is capable of “drawing people into the event”, making them mentally present and giving them a “festival experience” involving para-social interaction. But it might also be a question of whether people make their own “festival” at home (e.g., viewing with family and friends, making special food, etc.). This kind of behavior can probably give a feeling of togetherness, but it still is a question of “with whom ?”.

47When we look at what all these millions or even billions of people around the globe see and hear, we realize that they attend different versions of the ceremonies. Viewers in different countries do not experience the same things. The international feed, provided by the host broadcaster, is supplemented with commentators who not only provide translations and information, but also give different interpretations of what is going on. During the ceremonies the American broadcaster also has special privileges and in fact produces a very different event for their viewers (Puijk 1999).

Differentiated sports coverage

48During the games the (often) live transmissions of the competitions are at the centre of interest. Now it is sports that dominate the agenda, and not critical reporting of the organizing country or themes around the IOC. Even reporting and entertainment in many ways is dominated by sports ; reports about individual athletes, the competitions, failures by judges, drug problems and more, all focus on the competitions and its participants. The IOC and the hosting country control much of the media coverage – or at least the visual coverage of the competitions is in the hands of the Olympic Radio and Television Broadcaster supplying the international feed. Still, if we look at the television coverage of the Games in different countries we see that they differ quite a lot. Not only does every broadcaster provide a national angle in the commentary, but different sports are also treated differently in different countries. Some sports are attractive in certain countries, but receive scant attention on others. At any moment both tradition and individual national performers play a role in upholding a sport’s popularity. This also implies differences in the broadcaster’s priorities : popular sports are normally covered live, but less popular sports may be broadcasted later (live on tape) or not at all. What might be a sensation attracting much attention in one country may be unimportant in another. Just to give an example from Lillehammer, figure-skating broadcasts from Lillehammer were on the top-ten most-watched programmes of the decade in both the UK and the US. In the UK it was the return of Torville and Dean that made it the fourth-most-watched television programme between 1981 and today (BARB, n.d.). In the US the figure-skating competition involving Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan became the sixth-most-watched programme to date (Gorman 2009).

49The point here is of course that even though “the whole world” is watching the Olympics, we are watching different parts of it. While sprinting and swimming may be popular sports in the US, people in Pakistan and India are more likely to watch field hockey, while the Scandinavians like watching handball. It is like having been a tourist in a city : some have visited the museums, others have been shopping ; some have stayed in the pubs and others have danced all night in the discotheques. We have all been there, but have hardly seen anything in common (except for the airport) and no common experiences except for having been to the same city.

50The viewers of the Olympics often watch different competitions, and even though they have seen the same match the commentary has been vastly different, not least during the most intensive matches where one’s own country has the possibility of winning. Sports commentaries are notoriously biased : they talk to us in terms of ‘we’ and ‘they’ and identify with ‘our’ competitors. Competitions where national athletes are participating and winning are the most attractive and most watched competitions. “The framing of the international event in nationalistic terms has been a key feature of traditional representations of the Olympics, particularly on televisual platforms” (Marshall et al. 2010 : 267). The result is that national identification is the most obvious identification for the viewers.

51This implies that identification of the viewers is primarily based on nationality and not on a more embracing category of human kindness. As Levi Strauss (1966) has pointed out, games convert symmetry into an asymmetry, where they produce both winners and losers, while rituals unite its participants. National identification can be related to traditional television structures, as television has from the start been a national phenomenon. Television infrastructure has been built up to cover nations, and the coverage of international events has also gone through national broadcasters. The advent of satellite and international channels since the 1980s has not changed this situation very much for the Olympics. Being anxious to maximize their income, the IOC has sold rights on basis of national territories and in this way has favored national channels.

52The relation between Olympism and countries has always been difficult. The Olympic Charter states : “The Olympic Games are competitions between athletes in individual or team events and not between countries.” (Rule 6.1). Furthermore, “The Olympic Games are competitions between athletes in individual or team events and not between countries.” (Rule 57). Still, the athletes are members of national teams, they wear national uniforms, and their national anthem is played when they win. As mentioned, the main channels of communication are also most often organized at a national level. Digitization and the emergence of a new medium that is organized on a global basis (the Internet) have the potential of changing the situation.

Olympics in a digital world

53By using the Internet many actors today can bypass the traditional media and communicate globally by themselves. For sports organizations this provides new possibilities, but also the risk of competing with their allies, the traditional media. In principle new media provide the opportunity to unlock the present strong connection between sports coverage and nationality. In addition it facilitates a more participatory relation with the public. Marshall et al. identify two ways that new media images of the Games can potentially subvert the country-based framing of the television broadcasts (2010 : 267) : The presence of digitalization and large bandwidth implies that far more channels can be transmitted today than some years ago. While the rights holders used to be able only to transmit one channel at the time, today several channels can be transmitted simultaneously (either on the web or through digital television channels). As Marshall et al. note, the webcasts from Beijing were often without commentary. In this way these webcasts were less nationalistic and in principle accessible to anyone with a computer. But still in practice the rights are restricted to certain geographical areas and broadcasters use geo-blocking to prevent foreigners from watching the programmes. In addition the rights owners often earn more income from television broadcasts and use the Internet mostly for repeats.

54The use of mobile recording devices by spectators in attendance who record the events and spread this to friends (by peer-to-peer networks, social media) or more generally by uploading to YouTube. Writing about the Beijing Olympics Marshall et al. note that there were few restrictions on the use of recordings through social networks : What can be said is that the amateur distribution of images over mobiles was not curtailed in Beijing, and in fact many phones were distributed for this purpose as part of marketing campaigns by mobile phone/internet applications such as Fring (…). These applications did not appear to be subjected to the same level of scrutiny and legal challenge as those videos posted to YouTube, or to official digitally coded footage that was redistributed though non-authorized sites. (Marshall et al. 2010 : 267)

55The IOC is present on the Internet. On the IOC’s web pages people can access information about the organization as well as about previous and upcoming games. Both here and on YouTube one can find a number of official videos. By joining The Olympic Athletes’Hub on Facebook and Twitter one can become fan of athletes who are present in this ‘community’. In 2012 the IOC also announced a video competition “Show Your Best”, where non-Olympians can also contribute : The “Show Your Best” campaign is a global campaign and video competition aimed at engaging young people with the Olympic Movement and creating the next generation of Olympic fans by encouraging people from around the world to demonstrate their personal best (IOC 2012). By uploading videos that represent the Olympics values (excellence, friendship and respect) and “the idea of showing your best”, one had the possibility of winning a trip to London 2012. This initiative provided some interactivity between the IOC and “the public”. However, during the Games, the IOC was much more restrictive with respect to popular activity. A few weeks before London 2012, a discussion unfolded about the IOC’s and the local organizer’s (Locog) policy on spectators’ taking pictures and videos and distributing them on social-network sites (see BBC 2012, Addley 2012). Several critics have accused the IOC of behaving the same way the record and film industry have done by trying to forbid people from spreading images from the venues. The Locog ticket guidelines state : “Images, video and sound recordings of the Games taken by a Ticket Holder cannot be used for any purpose other than for private and domestic purposes and a Ticket Holder may not license, broadcast or publish video and/or sound recordings, including on social networking websites and the internet more generally.” In interviews press spokesmen from Locog admitted that it would be impossible to control this activity and argued that in particular people trying to use them for commercial purposes would be stopped.

New forms of communication

56The Olympic Games have developed in different periods, with specific ideological, political, sporting and economic structures and along with of course typical media at each stage. It began in a time when modern nation-states were formed, when modern transport and industrialization increased international contacts, when many other international organizations were founded and (amateur) sports were seen as an important educative device and a means of integrating society. The results were mediated through the printed press. Today the Olympics operate in a completely different context, in a global society with new forms of production and communication where professional sports are integrated in capitalist society into a sports-media complex. Over the last decades national television has been the main form of communication, reinforcing the country as the primary mode of identification. Today a new stage is being formed, with new platforms of communication, a new generation of athletes and new audiences with different media and communication habits. Moreover, in the future the Games will be covered in different ways by different media that will promote integration as well as conflicts and divergent interests. Digitization and the new and social media are changing ordinary people’s access to the Games. The BBC streamed 24 high-definition channels during London 2012. Having access to a range of competitions simultaneously fragments the audience and undermines the collective feeling that spectators had during the days of monopoly broadcasting. Marshal et al. note that the new mobile media allow people – especially in Europe – to watch sports in new contexts : The consumption of sport using new media in transit or in the workplace may signal wider changes in the consumption of sport, with some audiences moving away from consuming sports images in family or friendship groups, and towards the solo consumption of sport. (Marshal et al. 2010 : 270).

57But not only is it easy to jump from channel to channel. Today many people are multitasking, and they sit in front of their television with a laptop and a mobile phone in reach. But this does not necessarily lead to what Dayan dismisses as “a constant invitation to disengage from the surrounding community” (Dayan 2010 : 27). Different media can – and are often – used to engage in the same event : television to have the common experience, the Internet to get background information and social media (including mobile phones) to share the experience with friends, family and others. In this way one can imagine an even more intense experience and an even more intense feeling of communitas among engaged viewers. Without further research it is difficult to estimate the boundaries of these self-generated communities. They are obviously not nations, but might be relatively homogeneous or one that cross national, ethnic and social lines.

58The use of social and new media can be a challenge for IOC’s business model that is based on monopoly rights in different markets. To be sure, the IOC wants to protect their financial interests. But, Olympism is about more than making money – it is an ideology with basic values that surpass economic measurements. In the attempt to react to changes in patterns of communication and a globalised world, it is easy to act defensively and to insist on legal rights. It should also be imperative to develop policies and promote practices that contribute to building relations across nations and across different social and cultural groups. It is impossible to predict what these future patterns of communication will be, but this does not rule out the possibility that they cannot be influenced. Developing policies of communication that support Olympic values require dialogue with different stakeholders : athletes, sports organizations, organizing countries, media and not at least the public. If this implies a more nuanced view on property rights and on building of communication infrastructure, there are good reasons to rethink these.