The Spectacle Blog

Olympic Broadcast Agony

By on 2.27.06 | 4:16AM

Jed, I'm with you on style points. Wlady, see my column to come on the World Match Play. I think the TV-Oprahfication of the games began in earnest with the summer games in Australia, where the time zone shift made anything live impossible. NBC reduced that entire Olympics to a series of personality features. I miss the early days of ESPN, when you could watch unpolished rugby and Australian rules football. Nowadays, the major Olympic event seems to be the TV interview.

Send to Kindle

Re: Olympic Agonies

By on 2.27.06 | 12:04AM

Jed, I sympathize with you totally, to such an extent that I watched next to nothing of the Turin Olympiad. Sports competition is that last thing TV is interested in. The problem goes back decades, to whenever the "Up Close and Personal" segments began. (I'm afraid Roone Arledge might share the blame.) Moreover, once the winter games were switched to off years, for purely commercial reasons, who in heckfire could have possibly cared about any of the proceedings? Which is why we now have snowboarding and Sports Illustrated covers honoring our leading snowboarders, even the goofy gal who threw her gold medal away by trying to hotdog at the finish. It's a weird new world out there for anyone over 30.

Send to Kindle

Re: Olympic Agonies

By on 2.26.06 | 6:35PM

John: That's the whole point. If they want ratings, give us sports not some frozen romance novel. The reason women's figure skating gave them their best night is that guys tuned out days before, and stayed out. The NBCing eye dogs should take a look at the ratings Monday Night Football gets, and take a lesson. Full contact Olympics would mean all the diff.

Send to Kindle

Re: Olympic Agonies

By on 2.26.06 | 4:56PM

Jed: Your views on what makes a sport a sport have very little to do with ratings, and ratings are the only reason anyone is fretting over a disappointing Olympics in the first place. Women's figure skating is, by far, the most popular event at the Winter Olympics; it gave NBC its best night. Move it to daytime? Dream on.

Send to Kindle

Re: Olympic Agonies

By on 2.26.06 | 4:13PM

John: No matter how you slice it (or edit it) objective results are what make sports different from soap operas. Subjective scoring is inherently inconsistent with sports. If you add enough style points, you could make NFL football into a sport the ladies would play.

Send to Kindle

Re: Olympic Agonies

By on 2.26.06 | 3:03PM

I wouldn't be so hard on sports that include style points, especially now that judging is moving toward more objective measure. But the real problem with NBC's Olympic coverage has been the editing. Instead of showing one event start to finish, they cut back and forth between two different events. I guess this is supposed to keep the audience for both events glued to the TV, but it seems more likely to leave fans of one or the other sport too bored to stay tuned in -- particularly since they mix sports that appeal to different demographics. I'd imagine that a mix of figure skating and freestyle skiing aerials or ice dancing and snowboard cross pleases very few viewers.

Send to Kindle

Olympic Agonies

By on 2.26.06 | 2:24PM

The Winter Olympics -- thanks, mostly, to NBC -- have been a crashing bore. For all the bad ratings they've been getting, even worse have been earned. Now they're talking about how to fix it by breaking what little is left in one piece.

You may have seen some of the idiocy being touted on AOL, such as "athlete confessional rooms" for failures to wail away the hours and a new version of the Olympic Village. Great. Guarantee more touchy-feely junk and make Oprah the ever-present anchor. All this needs is Dr. Joyce Brothers debating Alan Dershowitz about the significance of failure.

Send to Kindle

On the Waterfront: The Facts, the Jingoists

By on 2.26.06 | 2:05PM

Observe that the WSJ editorial on the weekend -- “Ports of Gall” -- summarizes in cogent prose the facts of the matter of the port imbroglio. I mention that in the course of last week’s report, I learned that the jingoism, demagoguery, and base poor research by members of Congress are a sizable threat to rational political discourse.

The facts are that there are four major terminal operators on the planet. Number one is a private owned but China/> based firm from Hong Kong, Hutchinson/>, and will not do business in the U.S./>/> because of the unions and the shoddy port political environment. Number two and three are a Singapore/> government-owned entity and a privately owned entity from Denmark/>/>. With the DP World purchase of P&O, it becomes number four in the world.

Send to Kindle

Iraq WMD: Mystery/Threat Continues

By on 2.26.06 | 2:02PM

Spoke with UNSCOM veteran and Arab translator Bill Tierney re his work on the Saddam tapes that he released in Arabic at the intelligencecsummit.org.

We concentrated on the pericope where two named briefers, Maldoud and Abbas, report to Saddam Hussein with regard a “plasma” component of the Iraqi WMD program that is concealed from UN inspectors.

The date on the briefing is post 2000.

“Plasma” refers to the plasma separation process (PSP) that was developed by U.S. and French teams and then abandoned for other pursuits in the 1970s and 1980s.

Significant is that the Iraq Survey Group final report stated that Iraq/>/> quit pursuit of PSP in the early 1990s.

Also significant is that neither of the briefers was known to UNSCOM nor is mentioned in the Iraq Survey Group report: their whereabouts then and now is unknown.

Send to Kindle

Mitt for President?

By on 2.26.06 | 8:48AM

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney appeared on Fox News Sunday this morning. Here are the highlights:

-Speaking about the new prescription drug benefit: "We need to find a way to reduce the entitlement burden."

When the Massachusetts governor is more fiscally conservative than our Republican president, things are seriously wrong at the top.

-Romney's explanation of his evolving abortion positions was fairly weak. Though unwilling to be pinned down, he suggested that he concluded that human life begins at conception while researching the embryonic stem cell issue. Props to him that he now recognizes that fact. But his statement that he believes abortion belongs in the hands of the states and thus he wouldn't mess with Massachusetts's laws doesn't wash. As governor, he's the right person to help change state laws. To get elected, he took that off the table. He'll have to answer for that.

Send to Kindle

Pages