Slashdot Mirror


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."

43 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. So basically... by Nemilar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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!

    --
    Nemilar http://www.techthrob.com - Visit Me!
    1. Re:So basically... by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:So basically... by TheMeuge · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    3. Re:So basically... by j35ter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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!

      --
      Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
    4. Re:So basically... by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Interesting
      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.

    5. Re:So basically... by Snaller · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Are athletes going to be allowed to blog about Chinese human rights issues?"

      Yes. They'll be shot afterwards, but they can write what they want.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    6. Re:So basically... by SL+Baur · · Score: 2

      Woohoo, freedom of the press! This is a repeat of the 1936 Olympics. The less we know and care, the better. Really.
  2. Copyright?!?!?! by ilikepi314 · · Score: 2

    Still pictures are allowed as long as they do not show Olympic events Who copyrighted the Olympics?!? Why is it that I cannot take pictures of events and share them with friends if I am there? These freaking events have existed for centuries, how can you copyright that?!?!?!

    Or is this a security issue? If it is, then they need to get over it. This is getting ridiculous.
    1. Re:Copyright?!?!?! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Informative

      Still pictures are allowed as long as they do not show Olympic events Who copyrighted the Olympics?!? The IOC. Then they sell out the rights for a massive profit.

      It's also trademarked to Hell and back.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  3. Olympic Oxymoron by LingNoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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 found in effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.
    (Olympic Charter, Fundamental Principles, paragraph 1)

    I guess they forgot to add the clause, "except when in China".
    1. Re:Olympic Oxymoron by v1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      No doubt! This will last less than 24 hrs (if that) before china's censorship kicks into high gear. All it should take is oh, one picture of a picture of an entrant taken as he participated in Tiananmen Square...

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    2. Re:Olympic Oxymoron by Lally+Singh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Very fair.

      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). Bring them in and push for incremental change. It's messy and boring, but it's the best way to do it. If we require china to play by all the rules at once, they're unlikely to participate -- no progress made. If we ease them, then we can start a process which (hopefully) will get us somewhere.

      Messy, boring, and deeply unsatisfactory, yes. But it often works, and I personally can't think of a better solution that would work as well.

      --
      Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    3. Re:Olympic Oxymoron by sethstorm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles. Just redefine ethics to fit China's unique situations and the problem disappears[/sarcasm]. Economists have no issue with doing that by saying it's "opportunity cost".
      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  4. Boycot by zmooc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    *boycots olympic games entirely*

    --
    0x or or snor perron?!
  5. China can't just come in take athletes way to poli by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    China can't just come in take athletes way to political prisons so what does the athletes have to lose?

  6. Dear Diary by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Funny

    I woke up in China this morning. The place smells funny.
    The group went to a sporting event today, kind of exciting.
    Hopefully tomorrow I'll hear some music I like
    Goodnight

  7. What would happen? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  8. In the good old times... by mangu · · Score: 4, Interesting
    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!"

    1. Re:In the good old times... by Herkum01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can just picture those blogs now

      When I got up, I had a cool refreshing *Pepsi* while I put on my Ultra-Performance *Nike* shoes and my *Fruit of the Loom* running uniform.

      Make it one paragraph to describe every little thing and then have your blog run like 10 pages a day so that you can maximize your advertising revenue.

      That sounds like the Olympics of today!

    2. Re:In the good old times... by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Informative
      Olympic athletes used to be *amateurs*!

      Yes they were, when Avery Brundage was running the show. He also kicked the Jews off the US team in Berlin, and fought to keep the female events "decorative"...he'd be right at home in China.

      rj

    3. Re:In the good old times... by mangu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      when Avery Brundage was running the show. He also kicked the Jews off the US team in Berlin, and fought to keep the female events "decorative"

      Well, Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner. Apparently he fathered one or more children by one of his slaves. This can be labelled as rape, since the slave, willing or not, wasn't in a position to say "no".


      A man can have the right idea about something, yet be a total son of a bitch about something else.

  9. How the IOC killed the Olympics by Ranger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The insane restrictions of the IOC has really killed my interest in the Olympics. And along with the timeshifting the broadcast of events ruins my enjoyment.

    The pre-Disney ABC coverage of the Olympics and their Wild World of Sports was the best coverage of the Olympics and no one is ever going to be that good again. Especially with the ironfisted control by the IOC. So fuck you, International Olympics Committee.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  10. Re:China can't just come in take athletes way to p by webmaster404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    China can't just come in take athletes way to political prisons so what does the athletes have to lose?

    No but they can sure disqualify them in a heartbeat, then how does that work?

    --
    There is no "disagree" moderation, and troll, flamebait and overrated are not valid substitutes
  11. Copyright? Olympics? by Khyber · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How I wish the Greek gods existed, so they'd blast China and any corporation involved with the Olympics to hell. The Olypmics used to be a free public event for the 'known world' at that time to compete for fame, honor, and glory. Now it's compete for sponsorship dollars, advertising dollars, and getting your picture on a Wheaties box.

    I certainly won't be paying any attention to the Olympics, now. I'll be paying more attention to my cats in competition to see which one can get the little red dot that flies around every so often.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  12. No Commercial Gain by Blue+Stone · · Score: 5, Interesting
    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!'

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    1. Re:No Commercial Gain by coppro · · Score: 5, Informative

      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 IOC does it's very best to keep the Olympics non-commercial. As an example, you will see zero corporate logos on athlete equipment - it's completely forbidden at the the Olympics, though this form of sponsorship is quite common anywhere else. Preventing the athletes from commercializing their experiences at the games is important - it's true to the founding ideals of the games, and keeps it a competition, rather then "I got to the Olympics, so now I'm going to make $2 million writing about it." Look at the entertainment industry. It's sick and disgusting how much anyone in any form of entertainment (including professional sports) gets paid. They can go say how great some random product is, and they'll get paid millions for that endorsement. Imagine what would happen if athletes could use blogs in the same way: "I got up this morning to eat my Kellog's Corn Flakes Cereal because I really enjoy it and it helps me compete" and then get a massive dumping of money. The IOC is correct in banning commercial gain. I agree to a lesser extent as to the other policies - it makes sense to say that the athletes can't say stuff about each other, because blogs tend to be much more personal than interviews, and so some sexist or racist comments or drug accusations or whatnot might slip through, and the backlash would be much worse than these restrictions are.
    2. Re:No Commercial Gain by RealGrouchy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Correction: The IOC bans commercial gain for the athletes.

      It has no problem signing exclusivity deals for its own commercial gain.

      I don't see this ban on athletes' blogs as so much as having to do with pressure from China (I mean, why would China care whether athletes are blogging about the athletic side of the Olympics?), as having to do with pressure from the media corporations that spend oodles of money to have exclusive rights to broadcast Olympic events in their respective markets. The fact that it is in China is a mere coincidence--blogs simply weren't as big a threat two years ago.

      - RG> (a.k.a. area man who doesn't have a TV and won't be following the Olympics)

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  13. Link to non-registration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
  14. Re:Enough is Enough by schnikies79 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Olympic sport is supposed to be about human pure ability/endurance, not technical innovation. It's the same reason that steroids and such are banned.

    If we go by your thinking, why can't athletes use those motorized, piston-powered leg attachments that make you run faster? I feel bad for the guy, but he does have an advantage.

    I am a runner myself and running is my life, so I can see where they are coming from.

    --
    Gone!
  15. Disinterest in the Olympics by Trojan35 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anyone else notice that as the Olympics has shifted from Nationalism to Commercialism it's viewership and worldwide interest has dropped dramatically? I wonder when the people who run the Olympics will notice that. My guess: once it starts losing money.

  16. China shouldn't have been selected by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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!

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:China shouldn't have been selected by MLCT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if they signed (individually) a paper that they will not say anything against the regime? That is not what the "paper" said. Indeed the "paper" is a contract all UK Olympic athletes have had to sign for the last 20 odd years, and all it is is a reaffirmation of some of the rules they are all bound by anyway. The purpose of it is to ensure the athletes are fully aware of the rules so they cannot plead ignorance if they break them, as they have signed a contract. In the case of the extra text that was added to the contract for the 2008 games, it was simply a reaffirmation of the rule that political protests by athletes at Olympic venues is unacceptable. It was nothing about an inability to criticise "the regime", or anything like it. The media picked up this story and just made up what they didn't know (or didn't want to know) - 2008 Olympic "rights" stories (whether true or only half true) are good column filler, and will be for the next 6 months.

      And that said regime has, instead of improving, further cracked down on human rights and democracy activists? No disagreement from me. I can see the way this is all shaping up that the games may be a disaster for China - they thought everyone (inside & outside the country) would hush up an not make a big fuss for the sake of "the games" - quite the opposite is the case - if I were Amnesty International or any one of the other HR organisations I would be preparing for a multitude of high profile demonstrations and action around the games. Unfurling of a Free Tibet banner inside the Olympic Stadium - how will they respond? Tank Man part II would be a disaster for their "all is good in China" message. I think China hoped that everyone would just not cause any trouble, much like a family argument would be swept under the carpet if relatives come round - I can't see it happening. That being the case, the only good thing that may come out of this is that it might force wholesale reform.
  17. The Rules by owlnation · · Score: 4, Funny

    The First Rule of the Olympics is:

    You don't talk about the Olympics.

  18. Choice: Don't Go, or Put Up and Shut Up by hattig · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Without the athletes, the Olympics is nothing.

    If the athletes actually feel strongly about issues relating to China, then they can choose not to go. Sure, you'll lose out on marketing deals and fame and ... ah, yes, I think we know how deep their feelings actually are.

    Many arguments say the best way to bring China into the modern world is to integrate them despite their flaws, to expose their peoples to alternative viewpoints. If they are correct, then the Olympics will overall be a good thing despite any current issues.

  19. Re:wait what by hansonc · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you just think of it as twice every 4 years it's exactly the same as it was up until they separated the winter and summer games into different years.

  20. Re:China can't just come in take athletes way to p by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 4, Informative

    no they can't, china are just the host, its the IOC that have the say on that.

  21. Re:China can't just come in take athletes way to p by PlasticArmyMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... nobody would start a war over an athlete. Over a political figure possibly. Besides, unless it was a US athlete they wouldn't care anyway.

  22. Further restrictions for New Zealanders by Airw0lf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Are athletes going to be allowed to blog about Chinese human rights issues? If you're an athlete from New Zealand, probably not. They seem to have been asked to sign an agreement that prevents them from making political comments about the Chinese regime. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/14/sports/OLY-New-Zealand-Free-Speech.php
    1. Re:Further restrictions for New Zealanders by Lost+Engineer · · Score: 2, Interesting

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

  23. The Olympics is about money by Alain+Williams · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Olympics is about money, not sport - that died some years back. These restrictions are NOT of Chinese doing, it is the IOC that is doing it for it's own profit and that of the sponsors. It would be interesting to see how much money changes hands in brown paper bags.

    I shall not be watching - so don't count my eyes when you work out what the TV rights will cost.

  24. Not a terrible policy hut not great either. by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    I see their point. They don't want their athletes using the event to springboard a journalism career. This does involve interfering with their freedom of speech though. What if they want to tell everyone about the games in a more dispassionate way? Why shouldn't they?

    They also should not write about other athletes.

    Privacy? A bit heavy handed.

    Still pictures are allowed as long as they do not show Olympic events.

    Seems the IOC has become a corporate enterprise. It used to be all about promoting sports for its own sake. It's a shame that things have gone this way.

    Athletes must obtain the consent of their competitors if they wish to photograph them. Also, athletes cannot use their blogs for commercial gain."

    Both of these are laudable. The first is about the privacy of the other athletes. The second is about keeping to the amateur spirit of the games.

  25. Re:China can't just come in take athletes way to p by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Really? And how many guns does the IOC have? 'Cause the Chinese government has *lots*.

  26. Thus Continues the Spiral by Phoenix666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.