POLITICAL issue- Mega Events and Soft Power Flashcards
What were the main aims of this lecture?
Explain different dimensions of power operating in the debates around sports mega events
Analyse various interests and tension points between different stakeholders at local and global levels
Critically evaluate the role of sports mega events as a source of soft power and/or soft disempowerment
What is a SME?
Sports Mega Event=
Large-scale cultural (including commercial and sporting) events, which have a dramatic character, mass popular appeal and international significance.
They are typically organised by variable combinations of national governmental and international non- governmental organisations and thus can be said to be important elements in ‘official’ versions of public culture” (Roche, 1994, 2000: 1)
What does Horne, 2017 suggest about mega events?
There’s tiers of mega events, largest= 1st order SME’s vs 3rd order and others.
In terms of audience size, reach, cost & impact, etc. (Horne, 2017; Black, 2014)
- Hierarchies between SMEs – e.g., changing schedules, using lower events as stepping- stones
How can SME’s be seen as an issue?
Social, political, economic influences
- The involvement of various interests – contested terrain
- States
- TNCs
- Social activist groups, etc.
The concept of a ‘legacy’ in relation to SME’s?
Typical hopes for legacies:
- Economic lift
- Urban regeneration
- National pride
- Increased participation
- International prestige and soft power (by presenting new global agendas)
The concept of a ‘legacy’ in relation to SME’s?
(Tangible and intangible legacies)
Tangible= the material infrastructure or economic performance of the city.
Intangible= the emotive power of sport, the so called ‘feel-good factor’ (Horne, 2017)
Universal vs Selective legacies?
- Selective= serving the interests of particular groups (mostly dominant political and economic groups)
- Universal: “communal collectivist and inherently democratic, available by virtue and made freely accessible” (Horne, 2017)
Rhetoric vs Reality- how accurate is the idea of a positive legacy?
“Much of the discourse around ‘legacies’ from SMEs …. based on hope, not evidence” (Grix, 2016)
- Economic lift (e.g., tourism) – ‘displacement effect’ (Fourie et al., 2011)
- Urban re-generation –gentrification
- National pride/feel good factor – short-lived
- Increased participation in physical activity and sport – little evidence
(Grix et al., 2019, p. 25)
Give an example of abandoned infrastructure after the Olympic Games?
White elephants- Abandoned Athens Olympic 2004 Venues
Abandoned buildings after Rio 2016
After the 2018 Pyeongchang games, ski slopes were left abandoned and at risk of landslip.
Is there a gap between what becomes promised and what actually happens ?
The costs of public spending…
Comparison between legacy promises and whiter they were fulfilled.
Comparison between fulfilled legacies and other possibilities?
How can we debunk myths surrounding SME’s?
In layers…
The first layer:
* Legacy promises – have they been fulfilled? (yes / no)
The second layer:
* For everyone or for selective (powerful) groups of interests? (yes / no)
The third layer:
* What are the opportunity costs?
The fourth layer:
* What is the nature of the legacy discussion?
There are various stakeholders around SME’s, name a few?
Various stakeholders around SMEs
1) Event governing bodies: e.g., the IOC, FIFA, etc.
2) Transnational corporations- Adidas, Coca Cola, Samsung
3) Media networks- broadcast rights
4) Local businesses (construction, sponsors)
5) Taxpayers or general population
How do local businesses come into SME’s?
The Construction industry
* Increased demand for construction
- International contracts (e.g., multiplex)
Hospitality industry
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and retailers
How else, in terms of branding, do local businesses become effected by SME’s?
LONDON 2012:
Clean zones or brand exclusion zones within a 1 kilometre radius of the Olympic Park…
“In the run up to the Games, officials came down hard against any non- sponsors daring to associate themselves with the Olympics. A butcher was threatened with a $30,000 fine. His crime: dangling five sausages –- like Olympic rings –- in his shop window. And florist Lisa Cross was also threatened for her Olympic flower arrangement, complete with cardboard torch.
Lisa Cross: Everybody said, ‘What a wonderful display!’ At the end of the day we’re only supporting Team GB, so what are doing wrong? I can’t see what I’ve done wrong.”
How are taxpayers/ the general population affected by SME’s?
Higher-income groups / Low-income group
1) Being priced out of the post-event ‘gentrification’
2) The crowding out of other spending on welfare (e.g., West Ham United)
3) Intensified policing
How can SME’s be seen as a soft power strategy/ define soft power?
What is soft power?
Power: ‘the ability to affect others to get the outcomes you want’
- Three different ways of exercising power
(1) Sticks - coercion
(2) Carrots - payment
(3) Attraction – charm
(Joseph Nye’s soft power)
What does Nye say about soft power?
Two different types of power (Nye, 2004):
coercion vs. attraction
- Coercive power: power to influence the behaviour of others to get the outcomes one wants
- Soft power: “the ability to ‘attract and co-opt them to want what you want” (Nye, 2004: 2)
A nation’s soft power: “its ability to make itself ‘attractive’ to others (Grix, 2016: 155)
Can soft power strategies of nations, via SME’s go wrong?
(SOFT DISEMPOWERMENT)= reputation damages.
Migrant workers in Qatar= Abuse, exploitation, forced labour
- Soft disempowerment (Brannagan & Giulianotti, 2015): “wherever there is the attempt to accumulate soft power, there is always the possibility of soft disempowerment”
- Soft power strategies: a double-edged sword
- An opportunity to sell yourself, as well as to bring yourself down- the nation will be ‘known as it is, not as it wishes to be’ (Cull, 2008: 137)
Define glocal conciseness?
Glocal consciousness (Brannagan & Giulianotti, 2015):
- “how nation-states imagine themselves within the global context and position themselves vis-à-vis processes of globalization” (p. 705)
