Session 4: Is sport being used as a sign of soft power? Is it right for private firms to be interested in ownership of sports teams?
The past quarter has been a big one for sports. India and Sri Lanka are hosting the ICC Women's Cricket World Cup next month, Philippines recently hosted the Mens Volleyball World Cup, and the FIFA Club World Cup in the United States of America. There has been big debate behind the choice of these venues for these events with some believing these events are shown more as a sign of soft power instead of its purpose which is to celebrate the sport. At the same time, there has also been an increasing involvement of of capitalist firms in sports. This recently became evident with the Los Angeles Lakers being valued and sold at $10 Billion and Apollo Sports Capital planning on investing in Athletico Madrid.
As a result of these events, SAYDF organized a discussion on the role of sports in demonstrations of soft power as well as a rising interest of private firms and politics in sports. The first half of the discussion was focused on sports as a sign of soft power, while the latter half focused on the privatization of sports. In the first half, participants stated that various developing countries have recently seen major improvements in infrastructure such as highways, stadiums etc. and organizing sport competitions helps attract tourists as well as showcase this infrastructure to the world, thus improving the nations image. An example specifically mentioned by participants was that of Qatar and how its image on the global scale changed after hosting the 2022 FIFA World Cup, with tourism to the nation experiencing a boom after the event. At the same time other participants believed that any nation can organize and host a sports competition as most nations in today's world have sports facilities. Moreover they stated that soft power has more to do with the influence certain nations have over others. In addition to this, they highlighted how sports competitions bring lots of scrutiny to a nation while also serving as a site of widespread protest as was seen with LGBTQIA+ rights in the case of the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar.
In the second half of this discussion students focused on the recent trend towards privatization of sports and if it decreasing the value of sports. A few participants who supported the privatization of sports highlighted how this will lead to more people wanted to take sports as a career. They explained how previously sports was presented as a very risky option where money cannot be made easily, but the privatization of sports has changed that and led to more people undertaking sports as their career. Moreover, they also stated that the privatization of sports leads to certain sports expanding to geographies no one had ever imagined, leading to certain sports being known globally and not only in specific countries. To show this, they gave the example of the ICC Mens T20 World Cup that was organized last year in the West Indies and the United States of America. They highlighted how this lead to many people in the United States learning about cricket. Most of the other participants presented arguments highlighting that privatization is a movement in the wrong direction for sports. They argued that this is as it has lead to sport players prioritizing profit over the sport. Moreover, it leads to the fan experience decreasing with more of a focus on the profit. An example given to support this was the case of the Ronaldo shifting to the Saudi Pro League due to higher pay when compared to European Leagues, where the quality of football is higher.
Further links to read
Comments