The Beijing Olympics Fiasco – Who’s Really To Blame
A new controversy surrounding the Beijing Games erupted this week and once again, in a rather predictable fashion, calls for boycotting the Olympics rang out across the Net. Reporters from around the globe arriving in Beijing this past week to cover the Games found themselves being denied access to certain sites on the internet. It turned out that the Chinese government’s assurance that they would not censor the internet during the Beijing Games had gone unfulfilled. In addition, there were reports that the air quality in Beijing was still a concern as a haze could be seen in the air despite various efforts put into effect by the Chinese government to curb the levels of air pollution.
Apparently, that was then and this is now. Speaking at his first press conference in Beijing today, IOC president Jacques Rogge announced that many of the internet sites that were found to be blocked earlier in the week are now accessible to foreign journalists and Olympic officials have announced that the air quality in Beijing for the last six days has been deemed “adequate” for the Olympic Games. And in an obvious move to keep the positive momentum going, Rogge made the assertion that ultimately the “magic of the Games” will eclipse all these other issues, adding that the Beijing athletic village is the “best ever” as if to help prove his point.
But the reality is that no matter how much positive spin the IOC and Beijing try put on these problems, the fact is they are far from being resolved. In regards to unrestricted internet access, while it is true that some sites like Amnesty International have been unblocked, many other sites remain blocked with no indications of when, or if, Chinese officials will unblock them. As for the issue of air pollution, while Beijing and IOC officials try to present this as being improved or at least less of an issue, some pollution experts have pointed out that the system being used is less accurate than that used in other countries; there’s even been accusations that officials in charge of testing Beijing’s air quality have been fixing their results and taking recordings from outside Beijing instead of near its core.
It’s obvious that the IOC was hoping that by awarding China the 2008 Summer Olympics, the Chinese government would work to improve their record on human rights and environmental pollution. And perhaps they might have, if the IOC had insisted that China first make these changes before awarding them the Games. After all, once China won the bid, what leverage did the IOC really have to push for such changes? To assume that the Chinese government would make improvements on these issues simply because they would be hosting the Olympics is not only naive, something Rogge admitted may be the case in regards to the IOC’s assumption that China would grant uncensored internet access during the Games, it borders on the absurd. The Olympics after all is just an international sporting event, not a philosophy or doctrine for social change and improvement. And the IOC should have also been aware of the fact that even after the Olympics have come and gone, there are no guarantees that it will have a lasting positive impact on the host country. One need only look at Sarajevo for proof of that.
The simple fact here is that the only one who must carry the burden of responsibility for whatever mess becomes of the Beijing Olympics is the IOC since China has never hidden their policies regarding internet censorship or their troubles with air pollution. China has also made it clear on many occasions that they won’t be coerced into making changes in their domestic and international policies to assuage the rest of the world. So instead of calls for boycotting the Beijing Games, now less than a week away, we should instead be demanding that the IOC learn from this and couch their “idealism” with a solid dose of reality, if not being more reasonable regarding the changes they expect countries to make if they are to host the Olympic Games. That way, we can avoid or at least reduce the focus on political and/or social issues and put more on which athlete or competing team stands the best chance of winning the gold medal in any one of the various sporting events. That is, after all, what the focus of the Olympic Games should be all about.
Some other posts you may enjoy:
- Olympics Lessons On Improving Our Approach To Business
- Social-Networking Sites MySpace and Facebook – It’s Time For Some Change
- Is This The End of Mass Consumption?
- How Long Can Harper’s Government Last?
- Olympic Medals, Social Identity, and Ramses The Great – Yes, There Is A Connection
- Finding Our Passion Through Our Strengths
[...]Pingback – Original post by So, what were we talking about again? [...]
[...]Pingback – Interesting post which provides an insight into the issues that journalists have faced with gaining access to some websites on the internet, the environment and human rights. The blogger asks people not to boycott the Olympic games, but instead move on an support the athletes.[...]
i hope the games gonna be all right. and internet will always could be accesed. thanks for sharing, visit my blog anytime. thanks.
Hi Woody,
Once the Games actually start, I believe the focus will return back to the athletes and their performances. Granted, there will still be some who will insist on trashing these Games because of the host country, but by then the majority will have lost interest and instead, will want to focus more on the medal counts for nationalistic bragging rights.
Glad you enjoyed the post.