Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Olympians Banned From Blogging

Posted by michael on Fri Aug 20, 2004 05:58 PM
from the you'll-get-your-news-spoon-fed-and-you'll-like-it dept.
nodwick writes "CNN reports that in a bid to protect its lucrative media contracts, the IOC is barring competitors, coaches, and support personnel from writing firsthand accounts of their Olympic experience, on the web or in print, for the duration of the Games. Nor are they allowed to ever post photographs or movies that they've taken, including media of themselves, even after the Games are finished. They've threatened to disqualify anyone that violates their restrictions and sue them for monetary damages. Looks like an effort to clamp down on grassroots, word-of-mouth publicity for the Olympics -- good thing they're not having any problems selling tickets anyways, eh?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • What Idiots (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20 2004, @06:00PM (#10028570)
    Why on earth would you want to prevent these people from telling there stories? I know that some of the challenges they go through to get there and during the games, would be well worth sharing with others. Guess the Games have become about money too now.
    • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Interesting)

      by sketerpot (454020) <sketerpot@nOSpam.gmail.com> on Friday August 20 2004, @06:19PM (#10028735)
      Guess the Games have become about money too now.

      A small university in Nebraska held an event called the Rat Olympics [nebrwesleyan.edu], but the Olympics Committee apparently owns a trademark on the name of an ancient contest, and threatened to sue. There was no sense behind it, since the Rat Olympics was just a little event held by the Phychology department, but apparently the Olympics people are determined to prove to everyone that they sold their consciences.

      • Re:What Idiots (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Forbman (794277) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:37PM (#10028886)
        Although not seen this year, really, whenever the Olympics are held in a US city, there are lots of stories about how lots of companies with "olympic" in their names are chased down by the USOC/IOC.

        Sure, some of it is trying to catch the coattails. But going after a greek restaurant named "Olympic Cafe", which maybe has a stylized discus or javelin thrower or greek warrior head on it?

        Look at all the guff they've thrown at the Special Olympics, the Paralympic Games, etc. in the past.

        The IOC/USOC/media companies are so worried about "protecting" their investments that they are pissing on any sort of grassroots or whatever about it.

        I am enjoying watching some of the coverage, but because the US coverage is SOOO overly American-focused, it's disappointing. It gets worse every 2 years now, with Bob Costas inching slowly downward each time with his stupid, dismissive remarks. I like Bob Costas, in the right domain. NBC might as well have Bill Walton or Marv Albert doing the same thing as Bob. Jim Lampley (of course, he got started when ABC used to do it...) would be 100x better than Bob Costas in that role.

        Oh well. For those of you that can get non-NBC coverage of the Games, you're lucky!

      • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Interesting)

        by harlows_monkeys (106428) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:18PM (#10029169) Homepage
        A small university in Nebraska held an event called the Rat Olympics, but the Olympics Committee apparently owns a trademark on the name of an ancient contest, and threatened to sue

        That's why the Gay Games are not the Gay Olympics. It is particularly silly in that case, considering that the original Olympics consisted of naked athletes performing for horny male spectators.

      • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Interesting)

        by compwizrd (166184) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:27PM (#10029221) Homepage
        Back in about 1988 or so, they went after "Olympics of the Mind", who had to change their name to Odyssey of the Mind.
        • Re:What Idiots (Score:4, Interesting)

          by bfields (66644) on Friday August 20 2004, @08:03PM (#10029411) Homepage
          Back in about 1988 or so, they went after "Olympics of the Mind", who had to change their name to Odyssey of the Mind.

          Yeah, I remember that. Completely disgusting--to one the one hand attempt to claim a 2000-plus-year-old heritage and a shared world experience, and on the other hand to claim that it's all your own private property.

          Though I wonder whether anyone's ever actually fought them on this, or whether they're all just giving in when they get the first cease-and-desist letter. Does anyone know of any actual cases?

          --Bruce Fields

          • Cases and so on ... (Score:4, Informative)

            by bezuwork's friend (589226) on Friday August 20 2004, @10:22PM (#10030109)
            A little late, but I searched for the root olympic in the same paragraph as trademark in WestLaw and came up with 803 cases (federal and state/commonwealth).

            Look though at 36 USC 220506 [house.gov] or here at Cornell [cornell.edu] - this statute gives certain exclusive word rights to the US Olympic Committee for various terms including Olympics, Olympiad, and among other things Pan-American. See (a)(4). Not only Olympics et al. but Pan-American? How outrageous is that?

            There are however some exceptions in subsection (d) for prior use and limited other uses.

      • Re:What Idiots (Score:4, Interesting)

        by antiMStroll (664213) on Friday August 20 2004, @09:08PM (#10029720)
        The radio station serving Whistler BC, home of the next Winter Olympic games, isnt allowed to use the term '2010' in any sense that makes reference to the event other than in news reports. And some here joked that the current IP madness would result in corporate control of numbers and letters.
    • Speaking of idiots (Score:5, Informative)

      by sempf (214908) * on Friday August 20 2004, @07:17PM (#10029163) Homepage Journal
      RTFA.

      "An exception is if an athlete has a personal Web site that they did not set up specifically for the Games."

    • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jburroug (45317) <slashdot.acerbic@org> on Friday August 20 2004, @07:51PM (#10029356) Homepage Journal
      Because if they allowed the Olympians to share their personal stories directly with their fans online like this then NBC woudln't have any fresh material for the fluff pieces they use as filler when non-U.S. athletes are competing.

      Think about it, that would deprive NBC of like, half it's Olympic broadcast content.
    • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Writer (746272) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:57PM (#10029387)

      Guess the Games have become about money too now.

      They are also about the orgy that is the Olympic Village [scotsman.com].

    • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Informative)

      by ConceptJunkie (24823) on Friday August 20 2004, @08:09PM (#10029444) Homepage Journal
      Because the Olympic Committee are a bunch of money-grubbing slime bags who waant to maintain a monopoly on distributing media of this so-called non-professional competition.

      The Olympics have become too bogged down in corruption and conspiracy between committee members on the take, crooked judges and athelete on drugs. You know, I just can't care any more.

    • Blood Suckers (Score:5, Informative)

      by Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) on Friday August 20 2004, @08:25PM (#10029514) Homepage
      I live in Washington State (USA). Here we have the state capital of Olympia, Olympic mountain range, and not to mention America's finest piss water, Olympia Beer. A few years back, the Olympic Committee sued several businesses in Olympia and around the Olympic mountains for using "Olympia" in their name. I can only suspect that Miller Brewing, which owns Olympia Beer, paid them off, but the rest went to court and more or less lost.
    • Re:What Idiots (Score:5, Informative)

      by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Friday August 20 2004, @08:27PM (#10029523)
      Guess the Games have become about money too now.

      Nah. The Olympics have become about control . The people running them have this terribly simplistic and fairly out of date belief that the more control they exercise over information about the Olympics, the more money they will make.

      I think most everyone here knows what that approach leads to -- nepotism, corruption, stagnation and ultimately a slow rot into dismal irrelevance. The slack ticket sales are just one aspect of that retreat from glory.

      Short-term they may make more money, but in the process they are killing the goose that laid the golden egg. No amount of corporatized hype can sell people (or disuade them) on a product like word of mouth. The net is the ultimate mouth. If they don't want to strangle themselves to death, they need to wake up and realize that they need to cultivate the net's communications about the good stuff at the Olympics. Instead, all we get is stories about what a bunch of incompetent, corrupt political bastards are running the organization.

      Hey NBC -- I had little interest in the Olympics this time around, your only hope that I would have watched them would be an enticing, personal story that convinced me to follow-up. No, corporate-sanctified and sanitized fluffy news-bite is going to cut it, and now that your business partner has killed any other method for the news to get out, I'll probably never get that chance to hear that compelling story that would make me care. You should ask for a refund from the IOC.
  • But it's OK (Score:4, Funny)

    by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:01PM (#10028573) Journal
    The IOC are a non-profit organization so they can't be doing this for evil reasons.
    • Re:But it's OK (Score:5, Interesting)

      by racermd (314140) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:51PM (#10028994)
      I don't know why this is modded as "Funny", but what the heck...

      Some other interesting tidbits to note:

      The IOC (AFAIK) isn't based in any one country, so where would the lawsuits take place?
      Under what laws would competitors be held liable?
      How would this be any different than the average attendee posting results on *their* blog? How would they know? Does the IOC even care?

      I'm sure the IOC would be able to prevent most video and still cameras from entering the events with a non-media attendee, but they can't stop them from remembering what went on and reporting about it verbally.

      I found it very sneaky that NBC has full broadcast rights to the games in the USA, and has, with the cooperation of the IOC and other online media outlets, beaten back the "official" real-time online broadcasts from entering our borders. Methinks that NBC might have something to do with this new action by the IOC.

      Just a hunch, though.
  • *sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hot_Karls_bad_cavern (759797) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:01PM (#10028574) Journal
    "....that in a bid to protect its lucrative media contracts, the IOC is barring..."

    ...and i stopped reading. i'm not going to rant about the legacy of the games or this and that...i'm just going to say: keep 'em, keep the money, keep your coverage, keep the contracts and consider me disgusted.
    • Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)

      by garcia (6573) * on Friday August 20 2004, @06:06PM (#10028634) Homepage
      You mean you aren't impressed with the coverage? I am. I haven't seen anything other than swimming, gymnastics, or beach volleyball. Isn't that all that's on the Olympics anyway?

      Now for my rant about a specific Olympian and the media's quest to make the rest of us idolize him. Mind you, I was a swimmer (not at the international level though), and I always wanted to see more coverage of swimming. Problem with this year is the over-hype of that immature little prick that makes entirely too much money.

      So we have a 19 year old that set his first cocky record at 15 years and 9 months (youngest male ever in swimming and probably other sports). He got a huge contract from Visa but he had to forego his college elligibility to compete for money. He never grew up and he has a big mouth. The media helps his bad attitude by telling everyone he could break Spitz's record. He claims he only wanted one gold but I saw his cocky little smile showing that he wanted MONEY.

      If the IOC wants to make some fucking rules why not make rules banning professionals from competing? Then we can end this coverage of how bad the NBA stars suck at playing a TEAM SPORT and how Michael Phelps didn't make Spitz's record (BTW Spitz did them all in WR time).

      I'm more disgusted in hype than stupid IOC rules.
      • by mbourgon (186257) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:51PM (#10029352) Homepage
        Waaaaah.
        I haven't seen anything other than swimming, gymnastics, or beach volleyball.
        Then you're not just a troll, but one without a television. Let's see what's been shown today that ISN'T one of your hated sports...
        • Volleyball
        • High Jump
        • Hurdles
        • Hammer Throw
        • Triple Jump
        • 10000m run
        • 20k walk
        • Softball
        • Soccer
        • Cycling - Track
        • Boxing
        • Basketball
        • Tennis
        • Sailing
        • Judo
        • Ping-pong (miserable lameness filter)
        • Equestrian Dressage
        • Badminton Singles and Doubles
        • Rifle Shooting & Weightlifting.

        I believe NBC said they would cover something like 3 hours in EVERY SPORT. From what I've been taping this week, I have to agree. I've seen rafting, some sort of weird round-ball-with-hands, fencing, five more listed above, and all the other "hated" sports. Just because you're too lazy to look doesn't mean it's not there.

        specific Olympian and the media's quest to make the rest of us idolize him
        Ready? People like heroes. It's cool to see. Even if he didn't medal, the fact that he's racing 18 times is pretty darn impressive. The fact that he's winning... what, does it piss you off that someone's doing well? If it annoys you that much, hit mute and just watch and enjoy the games. Even if you hate him, guess what? You're getting more swimming, which more people are watching.
        Wah.

        I saw his cocky little smile showing that he wanted MONEY.
        And? What's wrong with that? More power to him. What is with the communist screed on slashdot over certain things?

        why not make rules banning professionals from competing
        I'll agree with you there. That was the whole point of bringing the Dream Team over the first time - you want pro, we'll bring pro. I'll agree with what Costas said... "Unfortunately, marketing won."
    • Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Funny)

      by adrianbaugh (696007) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:08PM (#10028647) Homepage Journal
      Wasn't it in a bid to protect something-or-other lucrative that the Trade Federation invaded Naboo? Call me harsh, but if some Gungans are going to get wasted I'm right behind the IOC... :-)
    • Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Interesting)

      by skribe (26534) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:09PM (#10029108) Homepage
      Their legacy extends to their hyperlinking policy [athens2004.com], which says that you have to apply in writing - they even include a snail-mail address - before linking to the Athens Olympic site [athens2004.com].
      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20 2004, @06:18PM (#10028720)
        The capital of Washington is Olympia, named for the Olympic mountains. The name predates the modern olympic games. There are a lot of stores in Olympia and other parts of Washinton that use "Olympic" in their name...or used to. The IOC sued them for trademark infringement several years ago and most changed their names rather than bankrupt themselves fighting the IOC in court.

        I think it's time for the world public to retake control of the IOC, they are completely out of control and destroying the games in their mad pursuit of money.
  • by IamGarageGuy 2 (687655) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:01PM (#10028588) Journal
    I would rather get the reports right from the competitors but the reality is that this is not about the people that are actually competing and more about the talking heads of the networks. Unfortunately we will put up with this and just say tsk! tsk!
  • by rice_web (604109) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:01PM (#10028590)
    ...the legality of the actions taken. For, who actually owns the Olympic games? How can these rights be changed from country to country? I'm absolutely flustered by it all, especially since I thought that, in the first place, taking photos at an event was entirely legal.
    • by C10H14N2 (640033) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:44PM (#10028953)
      The IOC. They get countries and commercial interests to spend billions because there's a boatload of money to be made by hosting and covering the games. The Olympics have ALWAYS been a private interest. Ownership of the games has for over a hundred years been controlled by the IOC. The atheletes are members who have agreed to abide by every whim of the IOC in return for being allowed to participate. There's NOTHING surprising or new here.
    • by yelvington (8169) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:03PM (#10029065) Homepage
      Sad to say: No, taking photos at an event -- for any purpose, including news -- may in fact be covered by a gray-ink "contract" printed on the back of your ticket. It's similar to a the EULAs in shrinkwrapped software.

      Sports sanctioning organizations figured out years ago that they're really entertainment companies, creating "intellectual property."

      And they do not want competition. So they create exclusive, licensed arrangements for distribution of this "property." This is why you cannot watch of the BBC's Olympics streaming video in the USA, or any of NBC's video streaming anywhere on the Web.

      Newspapers are not allowed to shoot video -- even though many newspapers shoot video these days, for their Web sites.

      Some sports organizations have gone so far as to claim ownership of basic facts and try to prevent realtime scoring and distribution of data on the Internet.

  • Not right!! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bgog (564818) * on Friday August 20 2004, @06:03PM (#10028605) Journal
    They shouldn't be alowed to do this.

    I know other parts of the world don't respect free speach as we 'try' to in the US but this is horrible.

    The medal winners need to organize and have a blogathon. They can't disqualify everyone.

    They IOC doesn't own the experiences of the athletes!!!! UGGGG
    • Freedoms (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fejikso (567395) on Friday August 20 2004, @08:59PM (#10029663) Homepage
      I know other parts of the world don't respect free speach as we 'try' to in the US but this is horrible.
      You could have used another country as an example for the respect for freedom of speech and of press.
      A current index [nationsonline.org] places the US in place 17.
  • One more reason... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Poseidon88 (791279) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:04PM (#10028614)
    Just another in a long list of reasons for me to not waste my time watching the Olympics on TV. I remember when just being at the Olympics was enough to justify a lifelong pursuit of perfection. Nowadays, it's just a ticket to a lucrative advertising career, and you'd better get the gold, because 2nd place won't get you on a Wheaties box.
    • by chris_mahan (256577) <chris.mahan@gmail.com> on Friday August 20 2004, @06:21PM (#10028760) Homepage
      You know who's pissed off? The Nepalese communist rebels. They've been blockading the capital Katmandu now for 2 days and no mention of it in the news. Even the 1.5 million people in the city don't find it amusing, and food prices are climbing steadily.

      Of course, the 16 year old from texas who can jump gets the coverage.

      I use my TV as a viewing device for my DVD player.
  • by Marc_Hawke (130338) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:05PM (#10028618)
    I'm sure this argument will be echoed by other posters, but I think this "Olympic blackout" policy by the IOC is getting ridiculous.

    But I also think that the problem is self-repairing.

    As it becomes more and more obvious that the Olympics are becoming NOTHING more than a corporate subsidized media event, the whole thing will revert to non-commercial, non-exclusive, pure competition. (Athletic competition, not commercial.)

    Of course, we might have to endure the NBC/Nike Olympic Games! first.

    Forbidding the athletes to post their own pictures is insane. I guess since the IOC makes the rules, they can just dis-allow someone from participating for any reason they want...but it's definately insane.
  • All Your Thoughts (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Eberlin (570874) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:06PM (#10028623) Homepage
    Are Belong To Us

    Let's see...you train your whole life to have a shot at this thing, enjoy the moment, and want to share that moment with anyone and everyone using your own words. Sounds like natural progression in technology, eh?

    Well, too bad. You've got corporate sponsors -- shoes, clothes, probably even the plane ticket to Athens. Then you've got people who commercialize this event so bad that they won't even let you share your thoughts unless they can make money off of it. You're a commodity, not some olympic hero. You're merchandise to be marketed and sold to a public who admire you. Your honor and glory amount to a feel-good story soundbyte...and that's about it.

    So much for the spirit of the olympics. I'd have taken the laurel wreath and the vat of olive oil. Then again I'm not an athlete...and I'm not at all marketable...so a good bottle of olive oil sounds nice.
  • by Trespass (225077) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:06PM (#10028635) Homepage
    The cold war is over. The feeling of 'east versus west' is gone. A lot of people don't care anymore. After the blatantly corrupt money-grab of the previous Olympics, even fewer people care. Attempts by the organization to commodify all aspects of the Olympic experience will only accelerate the trend.

    For me, the most heartening and yet saddest aspect of this debacle is the recognition of the power of the web to convey stories and images much faster and more efficiently than traditional outlets. I suppose the future is here, I guess I just hoped for something else.
  • WAIT (Score:4, Informative)

    by apraetor (248989) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:10PM (#10028665)
    They're only barred from writing for other news organizations, not for personal websites. Blogging isn't banned, according to the article.

    Rather, Olympians are prohibited from writing articles and taking photographs for publication by outside news agencies.

    This.. doesn't seem nearly so horrid. They can control which credentialed journalists get in, and make sure they've paid their dues and whatnot. The IOC is trying to prevent organizations from skipping past them and hiring on Olympians as insiders.
    • Re:WAIT (Score:5, Informative)

      by Concerned Onlooker (473481) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:26PM (#10028795) Journal
      The article is a little confusing. Near the top it states:
      An exception is if an athlete has a personal Web site that they did not set up specifically for the Game
      But two paragraphs later it says this:
      Participants in the games may respond to written questions from reporters or participate in online chat sessions -- akin to a face-to-face or telephone interview -- but they may not post journals or online diaries, blogs in Internet parlance, until the Games end August 29.
      It also says "athletes and other participants are also prohibited from posting any video, audio or still photos they take themselves, even after the games, unless they get permission ahead of time."

      This seems ludicrous to me. I might buy into the part about not posting while the event is happening, but after the fact? These athletes are doing what for many of them is a once-in-a-lifetime event and then they're prohibited from sharing their stories and images afterwards? The ahtletes had to work damn hard to get there. The media just had to buy their way in and now they're going to keep the participants from using their personal imagery.

  • by twitter (104583) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:13PM (#10028684) Homepage Journal
    Don't these people have any confidence in the superiority of their skills, equipment and planning? How sorry can they get?

    If I'm interested in a sport, I will want to see the full quality version. Sure, I'd love to read a blog or two, but what I'm really interested in is the event itself and I'll figure a way around M$NBC's stupid internet black out to get it.

    If I were an athlete, I'd tell the IOC to shove it just as soon as my event was over and post whatever I wanted my family and friends to see.

  • by MrNally (236174) on Friday August 20 2004, @06:15PM (#10028698) Homepage
    All this will take to reverse is one gold medalist posting a bunch of photos and movies their parents took of them.

    It doesn't matter what any court anywhere would say, they would be so pressured by public opinion over the matter that this wouldn't last.

    Just imagine if they tried to not let them compete, or take away a medal or something.

    Case closed.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20 2004, @06:20PM (#10028740)
    They don't even want people directing traffic to their site. Check out their policy here [athens2004.com] Ooops...So much for that rule :)
  • by crucini (98210) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:15PM (#10029153)
    Here are three trends:
    1. Universities were originally mere facilities in which learned professors could teach. The professor was the drawing power, and could teach in a self-rented hall or in the College. Gradually, the University has swollen in cost and power until it overshadows the professors. The University makes lots of rules to govern professors and students, and any one professor is disposable. Lately universities have been demanding ownership of online lecture produced by professors, so they can play them over and over, extracting revenue.
    2. Software companies own the copyright to code written by their employees. Increasingly, they even own patents. So the actually creative people are legally obstructed, but the mere shell, which produces nothing in itself, is increasingly powerful. We are approaching the point where there's no value in being a programmer, because the only value is in owning the rights that enable a certain application.
    3. The Olympics is ostensibly centered on the athletes. But more and more news stories illuminate the fact that the Olympics is a very powerful organization that can dictate terms to athletes. Although the athletes create all the value here, they own nothing.

    These professors, programmers and athletes get a small share of the value they create. Most of the value goes to those who have cleverly extended the "container" and claim the individual's achievement in the name of the container.

    It is an error to attribute the individual's achievement to the container in which he works.
  • Hardly Surprising (Score:5, Informative)

    by Beautyon (214567) on Friday August 20 2004, @07:33PM (#10029254) Homepage
    Given this piece of utter cluelessness:

    Hyperlink Policy

    ATHENS 2004 Organising Commitee for the Olympic Games -Website Hyperlink Policy

    For your protection and ours we have established a procedure for parties wishing to introduce a link to the ATHENS 2004 website on their site. By introducing a link to the ATHENS 2004 official Website on your site you are agreeing to comply with the ATHENS 2004 Website General Terms and Conditions. In order to place a link embedded in copy interested parties should:

    a) Use the term ATHENS 2004 only, and no other term as the text referent

    b) Not associate the link with any image, esp. the ATHENS 2004 Emblem (see paragraph below)

    c) Send a request letter to the Internet Department stating:
    * Short description of site
    * Reason for linking
    * Unique URL containing the link (if no unique URL than just the main URL)
    * Publishing period
    * Contact point (e-mail address)

    Once the request has been mailed, interested parties can proceed to include the link and will only receive a response if ATHENS 2004 does not accept the link. All requests should be sent to:

    The Internet Department
    Iolkou 8 and Filikis Eterias str.
    GR-142 34 N. Ionia, Athens
    Tel: +30 210 2004 000
    Fax: +30 210 2004 800
    e-mail: (All information submitted using this e-mail address is governed by the ATHENS 2004 Privacy Policy)
    terms@athens2004.gr
  • Attendance Issues (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ray Radlein (711289) on Friday August 20 2004, @10:30PM (#10030153) Homepage

    good thing they're not having any problems selling tickets anyways [voanews.com], eh?"
    I was watching the US women's soccer match against Australia the other morning, and the stands were quite honestly emptier than any stands I've ever seen for any sporting event, ever. The Whitbread across the ocean yacht race had more spectators. Mile 143 of the Iditarod had more spectators.

    There were no spectators on the far side of the stadium from the cameras. There were no spectators in the stands at either end zone. Not figuratively; literally: zero. And while I know that there must have been some spectators on the near side, because I heard one or two "USA!" cheers and, I think, an "Aussie Aussie Aussie!" cheer (also, the announcers mentioned that some of the players had family in attendance), they were invisible to the high stadium camera.

    Presumably, they were all clustered low, near the center line or behind the benches; but with the exception of one suspiciously close-cropped shot of a couple of cheering fans used as B-roll footage on a return from commercial, there was no visual evidence that anyone was in attendance.

    Now, I understand that women's socccer is not exactly as popular in Greece as it is in America, or even, say, Germany or Mexico; but I live in Atlanta and, you know, we sold out Archery -- not exactly a sport designed for thrilling live audiences -- in 1996. We sold out Field Hockey. We sold out the Modern Pentathlon. We sold out Team Handball, fer chrissakes, and it's hard to imagine a more obscure or unpopular sport in America (my wife and I went to it, too, and it was great fun to watch).

    As I said to King Kaufman at Salon.com [salon.com], "2004 in Athens marks the first Olympics to ever be boycotted by its host country."

    • Re:Wha--? (Score:5, Funny)

      by plover (150551) * on Friday August 20 2004, @06:16PM (#10028706) Homepage Journal
      You misspelled it. That's the "Visa / Kodak Olympics, brought to you by McDonalds, Nike, Adidas and CitiBank (TM) (R) (C), Copyright 2004, International Olympic Committee, all rights reserved worldwide."

      What was your question again?

      • I wonder if some bozo, say...me...were to start writing a blog about the Olympics as if I'm really there covering it.

        Could I get sued even though I'm not there and I'm just making everything I write up?

        If I had the time I would...but I'm too busy writing Slashdot comments.
        • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20 2004, @06:53PM (#10029005)
          He's right, they can't stop the athletes from taking pictures of themselves.

          It also states on the actual story on CNN, unlike the Slashdot story, that An exception is if an athlete has a personal Web site that they did not set up specifically for the Games.

          and
          they may not post journals or online diaries, blogs in Internet parlance, until the Games end August 29

          So yes, they can post blogs and pictures of themselves AFTER the games are over. The asshat that posted the story here on Slashdot got the story wrong trying to inflame people here.

          When in doubt, RTFA