Olympic Digital Age Controversy

Linda,

The opening ceremonies is not something I would spend time searching on the internet to find but another broadcast that intrigues me more would.  I think the internet has created competition much like satelite radio has in that it offers options but as far as changing my viewing habits, I'm not sure it will have that dramatic of an effect. 

With all that being said, I did catch the NBC tape delayed opening ceremonies and I was impressed, glad I watched.

Linda,

I started thinking why didn't NBC broadcast it live in the morning and re-broadcast it in the evening and then it hit me, the Olympics like any other Globally significant event has lost some its' true meaning due to the lure of financial reward. The more people watching in any given hour the more advertising dollars are generated. NBC was trying to reap the maximum reward for their investment dollars and showing it twice could impact its' evening audience and the prime advertising ($) time slots. It's a shame but the almighty dollar sometimes trumps true service to the viewing public. Then again, NBC is investing $1 Billion Dollars in the Olympics so maybe they are just trying for a palitable return on their investment. 

I have a question. Does NBC have a right to protect their investment?

David,

I agree, the opening ceremonies were impressive. It was especially awe inspiring because most of the effects were people powered as opposed to sophisticated computer generated magic.

This leads to another question, would we be able to survive without technology and is that a good thing?

NBC paid almost a billion dollars for "exclusive broadcasting rights" in the United States, and certainly they have the right to protect their investment... I think the bigger question for me is does that investment give them the right to control video footage posted on the internet (by blocking viewers in the US from accessing certain sites or demanding that the footage be pulled), or is their "ownership" of Olympic coverage limited only to Television?  Is it time to redefine what "broadcasting" means?

That so many of the effects were people-powered was mind boggling... particularly the opening section with the "moving blocks."  I can't imagine the amount of planning and practice that went into the entire event. It was spectacular, and I loved that they moved through Chinese history, and gave honor to the 51 ethnic groups resident in the country.

Linda,

I don't disagree with you on this but I do understand why NBC is trying to protect their investment. Like it or not, they are going to fight anyone who tries to bleed their revenue stream.

I didn't realize until Saturday night that they are streaming on the internet on NBColympics.com - so with that knowledge, my question is answered.

Still, I wonder how many TV sets have been turned off forever in lieu of watching the news, events, and regular shows via the internet -

I think it is a Web 3.0 question . . . to truly have content available on all mobile and technology mediums. NBC anticipated the massive amounts of people tuning in via the web - Deb posted on our own blog a couple of weeks ago (netpods.net) 'how will you be watching the olympics'?

My response would be that content vehicles are and have been fully aware of the shift to online viewing for quite sometime. Look at any of the local and national stations. They have largescale advertising campaigns that reach down to the granular level with embedded vid ads prior to the content being broadcast in. This discussion is my favorite because it brings in high level technology, marketing and advertising components - but I must say it is already well known to the content industry and they are addressing it with their interactive websites, targeted campaigns and techniques.

Go to adage.com sometime - in our office we have a LOT of advertising and marketing folks from Fox National Network, Oxygen, etc . . . and I was turned on to this mag rag from a discarded one in the common area. I am hooked and enjoy reading it.

--Chris

I hear all sides of this conversation; I am a big fan of free commerce. So I think that NBC has the right to broadcast in their own time frame, the right to TRY and control the streaming of the webcast early, and I believe in the right of people to send out links via twitter of the event early.

But much more exciting for me was the fact that NBC has had an incredible soundtrack this Olympic season. Including the Grateful Dead's China Cat Sunflower, Led Zeppelin's Down by the Seaside, and a bunch of Jimi Hendrix Blues. ;)

BR

How about the US Relay Team? Wasn't the race great? I guess a certain Frenchman is surrendering to the fact that the French lost and is retreating from the statement that they would crush the US team.

"I'm the hall monitor, it's my job". Words of the 9yo Chinese boy who dug his way out of an Earthquake collapsed building and then went back to rescue two classmates.

Two examples two countries, two reason to celebrate the ability of people to respond beyond all expectations when the situation demands it. 

"I'm the Hall Monitor - it's my job" should be the new MCC mantra.

One of the things I'm finding most fascinating about the Olympic coverage is the view into Chinese culture, so simply stated by that child.  Those I know who are deeply involved in cultural issues tell me it highlights the difference between eastern and western cultures... the east sees life through the portal of that which is for the good of the people at large. The west sees life through the portal of "what's in it for me?"

One of things that disturbed me is that they mentioned in the NBC intro that more than 500 million Chinese people live on less than $2, and over 5 Million homeless after the earthquake in May.  Later they mention over $40 Billion in renovations to the city of Beijing to get thing prepared (it was unclear whether or not that included the new construction costs of things like the water cube and birds nest). I just felt a little yucky knowing that our global priorities are with weightlifting and swimming, rather than feeding the hungry. Now I am not saying that spending money on the Olympics isn't important. The Olympics give the world a chance to unite and show strength and connectivity.  Greece actually went into dept to build their stadiums and did some fantastic stuff. They also spent less than 10% of what China did, and have the economic ability to manage that dept.

I guess I am on some rant, but it just feels weird to know how many people suffer in China, while we spend our money there.

I would love to hear what people think about this

BR

Ben,

Originally one of the reason why Olympics was started and revived was to show something about promoting world harmony through sporting endeavour. An opportunity for people of the world to get to know sports people from other countries.

But now Olympic has become more of Politics (its a show off), power and business (capitalist cash out !! ).

Few interesting facts this year:

Coke has spent an estimated $70 million to be one of the top 12 Olympic sponsors.

The top 12 sponsors spent $866 million to sponsor the games -- around one-third more than on Athens. The 12 sponsors are Atos Origin, Coca-Cola, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, Kodak, Lenovo (the only Chinese company of the 12), Manulife, McDonalds, Omega, Panasonic, Samsung, and Visa.

This was about one of our Presidential candidates (I am not going to say who):
"According to NBC's political file, the campaign had initially requested information about 500,000, $2 million and $4 million package of Olympics spots. The network also offered the candidate a $10 million package."

But nevertheless, the spirit of being together, sportsmanship, ability congratulate your competitor's win, bringing the world together...... still does exist !

Meanwhile, it is easy to forget what that money does for the Olympic Games: It funds them. It pays for the athletes to go, softens the burden of the host city, subsidizes the IOC, pays for the amenities the athletes enjoy, pays for the upkeep of the venues and more.

The angle corporations are taking is clear: Reap a reward for an investment, and impress your identity on the collective conscious of the Chinese consumer. But let's not forget that, without that "showing off" and those "capitalist cashouts," we would not have the games at all.

Robert and Terry make important points - advertising funds much of the Games (and for that we are grateful), AND the expenditure of the Chinese Government in preparing the country for the influx of millions of people and dollars is in opposition to the immediate need of "the people."

The country was already deep into reconstruction specific to the games when the earthquake hit, and the homelessness statistic is appalling. That millions in China live on $2 a day or less - - - well, is that because they are "dirt poor" in terms of their culture, or is it that their culture is less materialistic than the west?

I don't know the answer.