Interrogating inequalities in Sports Media: Examining gender representation in ESPN.com

Over the course of a week, I monitored the cover stories on ESPN's website. The coverage was heavily tilted towards men's basketball (both college and pro), and the Olympics as well, which was represented by both men and women (mostly men). In viewing these photos, it became apparent that the majority of the men were represented in "action" shots, which showed them displaying their athletic prowess. In contrast, the women were almost always posing in some form. In this way, males were typically represented as assertive through their athletic actions, and women were portrayed as more passive. The gender stereotypes that pervade our society are fully applicable within the world of sports, and it is fairly obvious that this creates idealistic images of males and females. Additionally, the amount of coverage of male-dominated sports is vastly disproportional to female sports. As I mentioned previously, I only noticed a couple female images on ESPN compared to hundreds of male images throughout the week. While sports have come a long way by allowing women opportunities to participate in them, it remains to be seen if we will ever see true equality with regards to the media coverage between male and female athletes. Additionally, there are still several barriers to cross with regards to what sports females are permitted to participate in. There have been a few stories of females on high school football teams, but they are usually at positions like the punter or field goal kicker as opposed to more athletic positions like receiver or runner. It will be interesting to see if the sports media will continue to portray women as passive and athletically inferior to men, because this has a vast influence on public perception on what athletes are capable of.

References: Espn.com

Reflecting on the Shame of College Sports: Should NCAA Div 1 Basketball and Football players get paid?

The issue of whether college athletes should get paid is a complex one, and has been increasingly debated in recent times. There are several compelling arguments for both sides that I will outline below.

In favor of paying college athletes, one could say that they are being exploited by the universities, who profit off of their name through merchandise and ticket sales. The absurdly large profits that the universities make through college football and basketball games each season is worthy of contempt when considering that the people they are making off of are not being fully compensated. While they are granted scholarships that pay their tuition, this is still a fraction of the amount that the athletic department makes.

In opposition to paying college athletes, one could say that they have traditionally not been paid, and that it would be in our best interest to keep it this way. This helps sustain the pride of college sport, and by not being paid like the pros, we can guarantee that they are playing the game because they truly love it, rather than for a paycheck. Additionally, they are compensated by getting a free education, and should not take this unique opportunity for granted.

Overall, there are intriguing arguments for both sides. Personally, I lean more towards not paying athletes for several reasons. Firstly, while football and basketball are the most popular college sports, they are not the only sports, and deciding whether to pay athletes who only play the popular sports or having to pay every college athlete would get tricky. Additionally, the universities have every right to maximize the profits from the games, because this can also help boost the community and local economy, as well as possibly persuade out of state kids to visit the college if they have an interest in watching a particularly successful football or basketball team. While I recognize that there are some quality arguments for paying the athletes, I ultimately think that there are too many logistics involved and that they should not be paid.

References: Branch, Taylor. The Shame of College Sports. Hartnett, Tyson. Why College Athletes Should Be Paid. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tyson-hartnett/college-athletes-should-be-paid_b_4133847.html. NYT Sport Economy.

High School Sport

Sport in high school has grown rapidly over the years, and is now a fundamental aspect of the high school experience for many students. It began in the early 1900s, but has progressed to become a fundamental part of local culture. On the surface level its purpose seems simple enough: to allow kids the opportunity to play competitive sports as a balance to the normal lifestyle of a high school student. The physical nature of sports leads to a healthy sense of well being and the opportunity to learn fundamental values such as teamwork and sacrifice while playing among and against fellow students. Additionally, events such as high school football and basketball games are social events that even non-athletes can have fun at as they cheer on their team. Despite these positives however, there is reason to believe that high school sport is beginning to be taken too seriously. As seen in the article, some athletes are targeted at an early age as "phenoms", and have an extraordinary amount of pressure put on them at a young age. Additionally, by placing such a serious emphasis on athletics in schools, there is a possibility that some student-athletes will disregard their academics, which is obviously the main reason they are in school. Because of this, I think it is up to the coaches to teach the players how to balance their lives with school and sports, and learn to be successful both on and off the field/court.

Once the cheering stops: The life of a retired pro-athlete

The life of a retired athlete is not an easy experience, despite having lived a life of luxury and prestige during their playing days. Many athletes end up bored or depressed after they retire, largely due to the change in routine. When playing, they were accustomed to a strict daily schedule that gave them a sense of purpose and organized their life so they felt productive. However, when they are done playing, they often do not know what to do, and this jarring reality has led to many unhappy retirees. Additionally, many former players make poor financial decisions, and end up blowing much of their lucrative salary on extravagant items or misguided investments. Their families rely on them for financial support, and they often feel obligated to support their friends and loved ones, which can also lead to irresponsible spending.

Personally, I think that the NFL and other professional sports leagues could make a better effort to help players transition to retirement. While living the glamorous life of a professional athlete, the ex-players have little "real world" experience, and the issues that result are troubling. I think if the athletes could be educated with possible options after their playing days, there would be less irresponsible spending and the players would be much happier in the long run. It's interesting to consider the downfall of a pro athlete: an individual who had it all, and then ended up with nothing. The reality is that good financial habits are indispensable no matter how rich you are, and I think it's imperative that athletes realize this, and that steps are taken so that they don't face the issues that so many former athletes have had to deal with.


References: 30 for 30 documentary, and the articles provided

Sport, Politics, and the Olympics

The 1972 Munich Olympic games were memorable due to a tragedy involving the murder of eleven Israeli olympians by eight Palestinian terrorists. The event was highly political in nature, because the terrorists wanted the 234 Palestinians held in Israel to be released, which was their motivation for the attack. While five of the terrorists were killed, the damage had already been done, and left a significant impact. However, the IOC made the controversial decision to let the games go on, and only postponed the Olympics for one day. There was a memorial service and the Olympic flags were lowered to half mast in recognition of the terrible event, but the impact of the tragedy was difficult to overcome as the games progressed.

Regarding the reading, I think that this event is most applicable to the use of the Olympics as a site for political demonstrations and violence by political dissidents in the host country. The Palestinian terrorists chose to commit their act in the location of the Olympics, so that they could make a powerful statement to other nations about their capabilities. Since the Olympics is a worldwide event, every nation became aware of the nature behind the attack, and could frame it in a political manner.

While I would prefer that sport be free of political interference, I don't believe that this is the case. The military flyovers and honoring of veterans, as well as the performing of the national anthem are all clear political connections that occur at almost every sporting event. I think it is clear that patriotism is directly correlated with sports, and that sports and politics will always be intertwined for as long as these displays occur.

References:

Rosenberg, Jennifer. http://history1900s.about.com/od/fadsfashion/a/olympics1972.htm