Athletes Can Blog at Olympics - with Restrictions

Hugh Pickens writes "The IOC has given athletes the right to blog at the Beijing Games this summer, a first for the Olympics. They're allowed, as long as they follow the many rules it set to protect copyright agreements, confidential information and security. The IOC said blogs by athletes 'should take the form of a diary or journal' and should not contain any interviews with other competitors at the games. They also should not write about other athletes. Still pictures are allowed as long as they do not show Olympic events. Athletes must obtain the consent of their competitors if they wish to photograph them. Also, athletes cannot use their blogs for commercial gain."

Comments

So basically...

[Nemilar]

From the summary, the rules are basically, "you may blog at the Olympics, but you may not blog about the Olympics. Unless you are blogging about what you had for breakfast at the Olympics, and you do not include pictures."

Woohoo, freedom of the press!

Re:So basically...

[TubeSteak]

Are athletes going to be allowed to blog about Chinese human rights issues?
IIRC, "Free Tibet" is not a message that will be welcomed in the Olympic Village or Olympic venues.

BTW - I get a registration link for TFA
http://news.google.com/news?q=ioc+blogging

Re:So basically...

[TheMeuge]

Not quite... it's more like:

You may blog at the Olympics, as long as you don't write anything that anyone wants to read.

Re:So basically...

[j35ter]

Uh, the IOC is surely not a corporation, and especially not the athletes employer. They're merely the organizers of the Olympic games.

Their infringement on athletes' rights is a scandal on its own!

Re:So basically...

[flyingsquid]

If they aren't boycotting the games already, then there is very little chance they would have any real concerns about Chinese human rights issues.

How much impact do you think Stephen Colbert would have had if he'd said, "the White House correspondent's dinner? But I hate the White House, I'm going to boycott it!" Instead, he took that as an opportunity to criticize the president, to his face, in front of all his staff and in front of the media. And there wasn't a damn thing the president could do.

Not showing up to the Olympics is pointless. You're throwing away years of hard work, and for what? China isn't going to suddenly stop supporting Sudan and Burma, or stop oppressing Tibetans just because a few athletes don't show. Or, you could show up, win a medal, get a moment in the spotlight, and use it to shed light on China's abuses, in China, with the entire world watching (of course, it might be a good time to bring attention to some U.S. human rights abuses as well).

I could be wrong here, but I don't think that the Chinese have the slightest clue what they're in for. The government can't simply crush dissent under the treads of a tank, like they did during Tienanmen, there will be witnesses everywhere, all with wireless laptops, Blackberries, blogs, cell phones, cell phone cameras, digital video recorders... everything will be covered by a dozen cameras and thousands of well-connected witnesses; it's the perfect time to make a statement, and it will be almost impossible for Beijing to stop you or retaliate. In a way, they're a little like our Bubble-Boy president, George W. Bush. He and his advisors inhabit a reality-proof bubble where dissent is not heard, so he was utterly unprepared for the idea that Colbert might use the opportunity to criticize him. Likewise, the Chinese leadership lives in a bubble where open dissent is not permitted, censorship is everywhere, and people will only criticize the government in private. After all those years of living in a heavily censored society, I think the idea that someone might actually stand up and speak out, publicly and in full view of everyone, is just inconceivable to them.

What would happen?

[Frosty Piss]

So... What exactly would happen to an athlete who violated this "rule"? Would they lose any medals? Be banned from competing? It's one thing to make such "rules", another to enforce them.

In the good old times...

[mangu]

Olympic athletes used to be *amateurs*! I once met Lasse Viren, a gold medallist in the 1972 and 1976 Olympics. He was a police officer in Finland, was never paid to run, didn't make any commercials, was never sponsored by anyone.

Today, the commercial spirit is so strong they have to carefully delimit anything that's published, pictures or words, about the event. Blogs must be carefully examined, lest there's something in there that might diminish the profits of the advertisers...

As they used to say when the Olympics were performed in the interests of sport alone, "O Tempora, O Mores!"

No Commercial Gain

[Blue Stone]

I love this bit: "Also, athletes cannot use their blogs for commercial gain."

Never mind that the modern Olympics has become rife with corporate sponsorship and bribery allegations. Just as long as the people who are supposed to count in all this - the athletes - don't make any money! Blech.

The thing that really gets me, though, is that althletes are not allowed to make political statements in the stadium - a stadium which is a political statement in itself: 'Hey guys! China's really quite nice! Never mind us raping Tibet, killing our own people and all that - look: Shiny Olympics! We're part of the civilized world! See!'

Re:Olympic Oxymoron

[Anonymous Coward]

However I'd like to add that to make ethical progress (as a species), we have to bring in those we disagree with (e.g. the ones who are really wrong).

Except that doesn't work as the Nazi Olympics have shown, it takes the death of a dictator for change to occur.

China shouldn't have been selected

[blind biker]

Have you heard that the UK team could only go to the olympic games in China, if they signed (individually) a paper that they will not say anything against the regime? And that said regime has, instead of improving, further cracked down on human rights and democracy activists?

Furthermore.... did you know that the air in most venues is too polluted to hold ANY outdoors competitions, let alone marathons?

So why was China selected, and the other candidates dropped?

Money and power? Naaaahh... never!

Re:China can't just come in take athletes way to p

[ccarson]

Right. Practically speaking, China's hands are tied. If China were to react over anything said by an athlete, they would have an International public relations disaster on their hands. They know this, feel cornered and is why they have attempted to make athletes sign contracts to shut them up.

Re:Further restrictions for New Zealanders

[Lost Engineer]

That's the case in the US too. I had the impression it was for every country when I read it in the Economist.

Thus Continues the Spiral

[Phoenix666]

into irrelevance that is the Olympics and its masters, the IOC. So rife with corruption, so lousy with commercialism, so compromised by professional "amateur" athletes.

Really, the original intention of the Olympics has been completely sand-blasted away. The IOC not allowing the very people who are making the whole pageant possible to talk/blog about what the experience is like? It's the absurd cherry on top of one giant whopping sundae of hypocrisy.

I will probably be shouted down by those who can't wait to wave the patriotic flag of country X at the games, but I say down with the Olympics, down with the IOC, and down with commercialized professional sports, for that matter.

Wake me up if the world ever gets back to sports that are about community and excellence and human achievement. Until then, there are many better things to do.