Posted on behalf of Kate Ryan:
The public complains that women’s sports are underrepresented in the media and female athletes try just as hard to compete in their sport and are just as skilled and qualified to play college and professional sports as their male counterparts. But I feel as though this issue about women’s sports is a no win situation in the eyes of the media. The relationship between female athletes and the sports world is directly correlated to the ideals our culture has created around what is feminine and what is masculine; and furthermore, that if these lines are blurred or crossed, it is not something that generally accepted. And things that are not accepted in our society receive little to no recognition.
The issue that many female athletes have to deal with is that of homosexuality because they play sports in the industry that is so heavily associated with male power and heterosexuality. Chapter 29 of the Handbook states, “The WNBA, for instance, has strategically represented itself in such a way as to counteract the American public’s fears about the players-and thus, by association, the sport- being homosexual.”(486). So to counteract that, women in professional sports tend to overcompensate by becoming overtly sexualized in the media. And all this does is reinforce the roles that men and women are supposed to fulfill in our society- men as powerful and aggressive, and women as feminine, graceful and submissive. What do you think about this idea, and is this kind of a cycle ever going to end in the world of sports?
In Dasna Woitkowski’s article, “The Sex of Sports” (http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/scisoc/sports02/papers/dwoitkowski.html)she writes “when the ABL and WNBA, particularly when the WNBA, started up, many people questioned whether women could play professionally and handle the pressure of living up to the NBA.” This already brings up one part of a multi-layered argument with gender and sports- why do you think there’s this established notion that women would not be able to handle playing in the same league, the same sport, as men?
Woitkowski goes on to further explain in her article that “As soon as commercial ads came out for the WNBA league, it was done in a fashion to show that the WNBA did consist of straight women and it was not a league for lesbians. Even though basketball is not a traditional sport, the idea of women playing a men's game at the professional level was a big deal. So even before the league started, someone felt that he/she had to prove that not all aggressive female athletes are gay. It's funny, but in a sad way, that women have to prove their sexual identity, but the men's are never questioned.” Why do you think women have to bear the burden to proving their sexuality, and men don’t? Do you think it’s even necessary to include or incorporate sexual orientation in the sports world? How much do you think the sports world discriminates against homosexuals?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Female Teams vs Male Teams: What's the difference?
“Within the frame of the media, the bodies of female athletes are understood and legitimated first and foremost as being about femininity rather than athleticism.” (Handbook, 487) Female athletes are held to a different standard than that of male athletes and not just in the media. Granted the media prefers to present female athletes as graceful beauties rather than aggressive powerhouses. Women athletes are most recognizable for playing individual sports and are hardly ever recognized for their team efforts. The media also tends to focus in on the fragile and emotional states of female athletes in comparison to male athletes and how that changes the game.
In Chapter 29 of the Handbook, there is a discussion about the problem of female team sports and the differences from male team sports. Although women tend to be viewed more for their femininity than their athletic ability, it is not to say that they are not valued as athletes. Women are hardly recognized for their team efforts but more for individual sports. The book gives an example from the WNBA that all female professional basketball players are required to complete their college eligibility or be twenty-one years old. These athletes are truly women so they can acquire their status as role models for little girls. But I ask you, should the NBA require their players to meet these same standards, or should the WNBA allow their players to join right out of high school? One of the main differences between men’s and women’s sports are the maturity levels of the players. This maturity aspect establishes the WNBA players as different from the NBA players because the maturity of the WNBA is a direct contrast to the “immaturity” of the NBA.
This is an article from a football (soccer) referee that has called games both for men and women at the professional level. http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/developing/refereeing/news/newsid=81770.html
This article touches upon the emotions and team spirit of women’s soccer in comparison to men’s. It discusses how women tend to create a bond between their teammates and have a genuine concern for their wellbeing. They create a second family among these players and most often have relationships both on and off the field. In contrast to the men’s games, some men play alongside players they dislike and are extremely successful whereas women who do not have established relationships off the field, may not be as successful. Chapter 14 in the Handbook, the differences between women’s emotions and attitude compared to men’s help to illustrate these teammate relationships. “Women’s emotions turn them into serious, moral people and make them more cooperative and team- or community-minded. While women’s emotions unite the team, men’s emotions individuate them.” Men are most concerned about their personal performance than that of the team, as a whole.
So now I ask you, do you think there is a difference in men’s and women’s team sports? Do you see more similarities with men’s and women’s individual sports, such as tennis and golf? Are hormones to blame for the team unity or is the male ego to blame for individuality? Are women’s sports the only sports that show team effort or is this just stereotyping?
In Chapter 29 of the Handbook, there is a discussion about the problem of female team sports and the differences from male team sports. Although women tend to be viewed more for their femininity than their athletic ability, it is not to say that they are not valued as athletes. Women are hardly recognized for their team efforts but more for individual sports. The book gives an example from the WNBA that all female professional basketball players are required to complete their college eligibility or be twenty-one years old. These athletes are truly women so they can acquire their status as role models for little girls. But I ask you, should the NBA require their players to meet these same standards, or should the WNBA allow their players to join right out of high school? One of the main differences between men’s and women’s sports are the maturity levels of the players. This maturity aspect establishes the WNBA players as different from the NBA players because the maturity of the WNBA is a direct contrast to the “immaturity” of the NBA.
This is an article from a football (soccer) referee that has called games both for men and women at the professional level. http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/developing/refereeing/news/newsid=81770.html
This article touches upon the emotions and team spirit of women’s soccer in comparison to men’s. It discusses how women tend to create a bond between their teammates and have a genuine concern for their wellbeing. They create a second family among these players and most often have relationships both on and off the field. In contrast to the men’s games, some men play alongside players they dislike and are extremely successful whereas women who do not have established relationships off the field, may not be as successful. Chapter 14 in the Handbook, the differences between women’s emotions and attitude compared to men’s help to illustrate these teammate relationships. “Women’s emotions turn them into serious, moral people and make them more cooperative and team- or community-minded. While women’s emotions unite the team, men’s emotions individuate them.” Men are most concerned about their personal performance than that of the team, as a whole.
So now I ask you, do you think there is a difference in men’s and women’s team sports? Do you see more similarities with men’s and women’s individual sports, such as tennis and golf? Are hormones to blame for the team unity or is the male ego to blame for individuality? Are women’s sports the only sports that show team effort or is this just stereotyping?
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Women in Sports: Athletes or Sex?
As previously mentioned in class, women as athletes are not taken as seriously as men. For one thing, the female version of many sports (lacrosse, rugby, softball, even golf) is extremely downplayed and less aggressive then male sports. The games are often boring, soft played, and not as entertaining as the full out, full contact, no exception, “balls to the walls” male version. So with this being said, how are women suppose to be taken seriously as athletes? How are they going to gain attention and recognition? Women athletes (especially the WTA and LGPA) are taking a business approach to athleticism and banking on the concept of marketing. So what is their new marketing secret? Sex Appeal.
In Chapter 6 of Mediasport, Wenner discusses “Marketing, Sport, and the Mass Media”. He states how there are a few marketing techniques that sell women’s sport, some including: conflict, heroines, and “little girls and sweethearts”. Now, little girls and sweethearts aren’t exactly sex appeal. But this wasn’t gaining them attention or recognition. In 1987, “the LPGA and women’s professional tennis involves pressures to be slim, look sexy, and act ‘feminine’ (95). Over twenty years later, and the two sports have taken these pressures and turned them into a way to survive as an athlete.
The article, “Women’s Tennis Cashing in on Sex Appeal” (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/8-29-2006-106944.asp) by Mark Hoerrner discusses how superstar tennis players such as Sharapova, Kournikova, and the Williams sisters are capitalizing on their sexy images and status as an athlete to acclaim highly profitable endorsements. The article mentions how Kornikova hasn’t won a single title, yet has million dollar endorsements. The women athletes know the men athletes take more to the bank. So their thoughts are we have the status of athletes so why not combine that with our good looks and cash in too.
The questions I want to ask the class are: is it fair how women athletes play up sex appeal to gain status and attention? Do you think it is a legitimate way to get your name recognized as an athlete? Also, do you think they are only making the issue of unequal gender rights worse? Do you think women are belittling themselves by using their attractive to make their way to the top? Will these women athletes ever be recognized solely for their athletic ability, or will their attractiveness always help them gain stature? What about more women athletic heroines?
In Chapter 6 of Mediasport, Wenner discusses “Marketing, Sport, and the Mass Media”. He states how there are a few marketing techniques that sell women’s sport, some including: conflict, heroines, and “little girls and sweethearts”. Now, little girls and sweethearts aren’t exactly sex appeal. But this wasn’t gaining them attention or recognition. In 1987, “the LPGA and women’s professional tennis involves pressures to be slim, look sexy, and act ‘feminine’ (95). Over twenty years later, and the two sports have taken these pressures and turned them into a way to survive as an athlete.
The article, “Women’s Tennis Cashing in on Sex Appeal” (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/8-29-2006-106944.asp) by Mark Hoerrner discusses how superstar tennis players such as Sharapova, Kournikova, and the Williams sisters are capitalizing on their sexy images and status as an athlete to acclaim highly profitable endorsements. The article mentions how Kornikova hasn’t won a single title, yet has million dollar endorsements. The women athletes know the men athletes take more to the bank. So their thoughts are we have the status of athletes so why not combine that with our good looks and cash in too.
The questions I want to ask the class are: is it fair how women athletes play up sex appeal to gain status and attention? Do you think it is a legitimate way to get your name recognized as an athlete? Also, do you think they are only making the issue of unequal gender rights worse? Do you think women are belittling themselves by using their attractive to make their way to the top? Will these women athletes ever be recognized solely for their athletic ability, or will their attractiveness always help them gain stature? What about more women athletic heroines?
Monday, March 24, 2008
Women's Sports Audiences
Posted on behalf of Tyler Howes:
Many people complain about the lack of coverage and promotion for women’s sports as compared to men’s sports, but is it not somewhat justified? In this article:
Ideas & Trends; Why Don't Women Watch Women's Sports? - New York Times
It discusses the television audiences, or lack thereof, as well as poor attendance of women’s sports. With the exception of some golf and tennis tournaments, and…I… guess figure skating? Women’s sports events are sparsely populated and never watched. Take for instance the WNBA which is dire need of a defibrillator. Their games draw 1/3 of the television audience of NBA games on average, and half of those viewers are male. Women’s soccer brings in just one-tenth of the already dismal numbers of basketball. So why don’t women want to watch women in sports? As ESPN.com columnist Stacy Pressman so eloquently explains in the article; ''I'm bored out of my skull at women's basketball games…I prefer a few women's events, like tennis, but I refuse to be politically correct about basketball…I'm sorry, but 40 minutes of underhanded lay-ups is not entertaining.'' Take for example right now, with the NCAA tournaments. The women’s tournament gets far less glamour and discussion than the men’s tournament.
Chapter 6 of MediaSport discusses the issues in women’s sports journalism and marketing. Some of the questions it poses in dealing with the coverage of women’s sports are; how do advertisers decide when a sporting event is worth commercial media sponsorship? What is the correlation between audience size and appeal and the coverage it receives? So what do you guys think, why don’t women watch women the way that men watch men’s sports?
Many people complain about the lack of coverage and promotion for women’s sports as compared to men’s sports, but is it not somewhat justified? In this article:
Ideas & Trends; Why Don't Women Watch Women's Sports? - New York Times
It discusses the television audiences, or lack thereof, as well as poor attendance of women’s sports. With the exception of some golf and tennis tournaments, and…I… guess figure skating? Women’s sports events are sparsely populated and never watched. Take for instance the WNBA which is dire need of a defibrillator. Their games draw 1/3 of the television audience of NBA games on average, and half of those viewers are male. Women’s soccer brings in just one-tenth of the already dismal numbers of basketball. So why don’t women want to watch women in sports? As ESPN.com columnist Stacy Pressman so eloquently explains in the article; ''I'm bored out of my skull at women's basketball games…I prefer a few women's events, like tennis, but I refuse to be politically correct about basketball…I'm sorry, but 40 minutes of underhanded lay-ups is not entertaining.'' Take for example right now, with the NCAA tournaments. The women’s tournament gets far less glamour and discussion than the men’s tournament.
Chapter 6 of MediaSport discusses the issues in women’s sports journalism and marketing. Some of the questions it poses in dealing with the coverage of women’s sports are; how do advertisers decide when a sporting event is worth commercial media sponsorship? What is the correlation between audience size and appeal and the coverage it receives? So what do you guys think, why don’t women watch women the way that men watch men’s sports?
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Audiences & Fandom
There is no escaping the fact that sports are a very important part of not just our society in America but all over the world as well. Along with the impact of sports on a country are of course: the fans. I believe that fans are one of the most important parts of sports today and without the fans, maybe sports wouldn't have the impact that they do today.
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/mar/22/game-on/
This article describes a few sports fans and their behavoir which is very similar to how the handbook of sports media (Ch. 19) describes sports fans. It describes fans as planning their weekends and parties around games and matches, facing cold weather to sit through live games, and discussing their knowledge of their favorite teams with other fans to show their pride. One of the men in the article is described by his wife as not being able to talk or disrupt him during a game and also going into detail about what he wears to live games (sounds like my dad and brother).
But why are we so dedicated to being fans? Well, the book also explains that sports fans use sports as their escape from reality. "Like a film or book, sports can be picked up when a fan needs comfort, relaxation, or release." I believe that many sports fans use sports as an outlet. Playing sports isn't just an outlet to release stress, but so is watching them and being a part of them by being a fan. People show up to their favorite team's games painted in the team's colors and decked out in jerseys of their favorite palyers because it's fun for them. However I do also believe that being a fan can lead to stress, if you're the type of sports fan to let a loss of a game get you down so much it affects the rest of your day or even week (I've seen it happen). Even watching games on TV can be stressful. I've seen my brother yell at the TV during basketball games as if it was gonna yell back at him.
I also think that being a sports fan of a certain team isntantly makes you part of a larger group of fans. You can clearly see this with New York and Boston fans. Fans from these cities are so proud of their teams and where they come from. Often, this is why they are fans of the teams that they love. New York and Boston fans I think also have a reputation for having the biggest rivalry and do some pretty crazy things to support their teams. But one question to wonder is how much is too much when it comes to being an outrageous die-hard fan? Is there such thing as too much?
I also found this from espn.com, it's some rules for being a sports fan and I thought it was funny:
http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/020227
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/mar/22/game-on/
This article describes a few sports fans and their behavoir which is very similar to how the handbook of sports media (Ch. 19) describes sports fans. It describes fans as planning their weekends and parties around games and matches, facing cold weather to sit through live games, and discussing their knowledge of their favorite teams with other fans to show their pride. One of the men in the article is described by his wife as not being able to talk or disrupt him during a game and also going into detail about what he wears to live games (sounds like my dad and brother).
But why are we so dedicated to being fans? Well, the book also explains that sports fans use sports as their escape from reality. "Like a film or book, sports can be picked up when a fan needs comfort, relaxation, or release." I believe that many sports fans use sports as an outlet. Playing sports isn't just an outlet to release stress, but so is watching them and being a part of them by being a fan. People show up to their favorite team's games painted in the team's colors and decked out in jerseys of their favorite palyers because it's fun for them. However I do also believe that being a fan can lead to stress, if you're the type of sports fan to let a loss of a game get you down so much it affects the rest of your day or even week (I've seen it happen). Even watching games on TV can be stressful. I've seen my brother yell at the TV during basketball games as if it was gonna yell back at him.
I also think that being a sports fan of a certain team isntantly makes you part of a larger group of fans. You can clearly see this with New York and Boston fans. Fans from these cities are so proud of their teams and where they come from. Often, this is why they are fans of the teams that they love. New York and Boston fans I think also have a reputation for having the biggest rivalry and do some pretty crazy things to support their teams. But one question to wonder is how much is too much when it comes to being an outrageous die-hard fan? Is there such thing as too much?
I also found this from espn.com, it's some rules for being a sports fan and I thought it was funny:
http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/020227
Audience and Fandom - Taking it too far
With NCAA basketball's March Madness in full swing and my topic being "Audiences and Fandom", I chose to take a different approach when considering the excitement and actions of fans during these action packed games. This approach deals when the dedication and love for a team turns negative which is shown in the article by Grant Wahl in Sports Illustrated. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/grant_wahl/02/26/abusive.fans0303/index.html
Sports fans range from the casual fan who can take in the game in a social setting and not show too much emotion to the competely captivated and at times deranged sports fan. In Daniel Wann's piece "The Causes and Consequences of Sport Team Identification" from the Handbook of Sports Media he describes the latter type of fan as "dressed (and perhaps painted) in their team's color and logo, cheer and/or boo loudly throughout the contest, and appear as though their existence is hinging on every play." (331)
Wann then writes that fans become so close to their teams to satisfy their "need for belonging and affiliation, that is, his or her desire to feel unity and cohesion with others." (334) The problem is when the more rambunctious fans overdo it as in the Sports Illustrated article where Wahl details how UCLA star Kevin Love received death threats on his phone when he went back and played in his home state of Oregon. His father Stan even said that kids as young as 6 years old had signs saying "KEVIN LOVE SUCKS".
Michigan State coach Tom Izzo went as far as to say that "The abuse that fans are bringing day to day, whether it's on talk radio or in the stands, is going to ruin the game eventually."
Death threats and threats of physical violence on players like Love and Eric Gordon, star of the Indiana team, are mentioned in the article but so are things such as Duke's fans making pokes at Maryland for having the lowest graduation rate in the ACC. This doesn't seem as bad but it's difficult to judge. There's also the mention of racial and anti-gay signs such as signs from Pittsburgh fans when they played West Virginia saying "BROKEBACK MOUNTAINEERS".
My question is when does this all go too far? What things from the article do you consider tolerable? What things are intolerable? Why do you think fans go this far with rooting for their teams? Do you think Michigan St. coach Tom Izzo is right in saying these over the top fans are going to ruin the game? What suggestions do you have for schools to fix the problem?
Sports fans range from the casual fan who can take in the game in a social setting and not show too much emotion to the competely captivated and at times deranged sports fan. In Daniel Wann's piece "The Causes and Consequences of Sport Team Identification" from the Handbook of Sports Media he describes the latter type of fan as "dressed (and perhaps painted) in their team's color and logo, cheer and/or boo loudly throughout the contest, and appear as though their existence is hinging on every play." (331)
Wann then writes that fans become so close to their teams to satisfy their "need for belonging and affiliation, that is, his or her desire to feel unity and cohesion with others." (334) The problem is when the more rambunctious fans overdo it as in the Sports Illustrated article where Wahl details how UCLA star Kevin Love received death threats on his phone when he went back and played in his home state of Oregon. His father Stan even said that kids as young as 6 years old had signs saying "KEVIN LOVE SUCKS".
Michigan State coach Tom Izzo went as far as to say that "The abuse that fans are bringing day to day, whether it's on talk radio or in the stands, is going to ruin the game eventually."
Death threats and threats of physical violence on players like Love and Eric Gordon, star of the Indiana team, are mentioned in the article but so are things such as Duke's fans making pokes at Maryland for having the lowest graduation rate in the ACC. This doesn't seem as bad but it's difficult to judge. There's also the mention of racial and anti-gay signs such as signs from Pittsburgh fans when they played West Virginia saying "BROKEBACK MOUNTAINEERS".
My question is when does this all go too far? What things from the article do you consider tolerable? What things are intolerable? Why do you think fans go this far with rooting for their teams? Do you think Michigan St. coach Tom Izzo is right in saying these over the top fans are going to ruin the game? What suggestions do you have for schools to fix the problem?
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Sports, Movies, & their Impact
Why do we as a society care so much about sports? If someone tried to list every aspect in a society that sports can they would probably only get about half-way. We dedicate specific days to sports (football on sunday), intertior design to a favorite team, all along with our hopes a dreams, highs a lows. Sports seem to be more than just entertainment they are a way of life (to some). Children are raised to become die-hard fans and "hate" the rival, and this love-hate is a comodity. Is this why Sports movies can effect our lives as well? I grew up with the "Little Giants" and the "Mighty Ducks". I would emulate players hitting buzzer beating shots in my room (and if I missed, I was fouled.) But there are also sports movies like "Remeber the Titans" that can teach us more.
This article brings up the impact sports movies have on our culture. http://media.www.uwmleader.com/media/storage/paper980/news/2005/10/26/Sports/Impact.Of.Sports.Movies-1987341.shtml
Do you agree with what is said? why do these movies touch us in a way that no other movie genre can? Sports movies can create heroes and seemingly freeze time. We watch sports for entertainment, loyalty, bragging rights (the list could go on); so why do we watch sports movies? Hollywood has grasped the concept that sports not only entertain they can also shape a persons life. Do you believe this is true? or even a good thing?
On a side note, not related to this particular blog, I found this article on espn.com on different styles to pick your bracket.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=celebrities/080317
If nothing else its good for a few laughs, but since the class is in a bracket group it may provide some insightful tips.
This article brings up the impact sports movies have on our culture. http://media.www.uwmleader.com/media/storage/paper980/news/2005/10/26/Sports/Impact.Of.Sports.Movies-1987341.shtml
Do you agree with what is said? why do these movies touch us in a way that no other movie genre can? Sports movies can create heroes and seemingly freeze time. We watch sports for entertainment, loyalty, bragging rights (the list could go on); so why do we watch sports movies? Hollywood has grasped the concept that sports not only entertain they can also shape a persons life. Do you believe this is true? or even a good thing?
On a side note, not related to this particular blog, I found this article on espn.com on different styles to pick your bracket.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=celebrities/080317
If nothing else its good for a few laughs, but since the class is in a bracket group it may provide some insightful tips.
Monday, March 17, 2008
The Sports Movie
What is it about sports films that touch our heart? The sports film continues to make millions at the box office no matter how many times the sport has been covered in a film before. There are so many different twists and turns that make a sports film unique and strike a personal chord with an audience that make it successful, and therefore never go out of style. There is literally a sports movie for every sports fan. They can relate because they can find something in them depicted during the movie. In chapter 11 of our handbook, it says "The sports film genre is as prolific as it is popular." Meaning, there are a lot of sports movies produced, but they still have success with audiences. In the article I found in Variety Magazine titled "Hollywood Bets on a Few Good Sports" the author, Dave McNary, reiterates that same mantra. He interviewed producer-director Brian Robbins(Hardball, Coach Carter, Dreamer) who points out that "Like any genre, when films work, it winds up sparking a lot of development. The success of sports films makes people realize that there are a lot of great stories in sports that inherently touch people on a personal basis."
Despite popularity for the Sports film genre in the United States, sports films fail to do as well overseas. In McNary's article http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117910572.html?categoryid=1011&cs=1&query=hollywood+bets+on+a+few+good+sports he cites that the baseball film The Rookie made $75 million in the United States, but only accrued $5 million overseas. Miracle and Seabiscuit had similar fates outside of America. This article was printed in 2004, but I don't think sports films have had much better luck in the past 4 years internationally. My question for everyone is why do you believe sports films can thrive in the United States? How can there be so many films about the same sport and still have successful runs at the box office? Also, why do you think sports films don't do as well overseas? Why would a film like Bend It Like Beckham have more popularity than a film like The Rookie? Why wouldn't a film like Miracle do well even though hockey is very popular internationally?
Just as an extra tidbit, I just found another article written by McNary about the Sports film genre on March 7, 2008. He claims that the recent "so-so" performance of Will Ferrell's sports film Semi-Pro is nothing to worry about for the sports film genre. The sports genre will pick back up again with the upcoming George Clooney film Leatherheads. Producers aren't giving up on the genre just yet. Just because there is a small dip in box office success recently, it will come back around. Do you agree? http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117982074.html?categoryid=1019&cs=1
Despite popularity for the Sports film genre in the United States, sports films fail to do as well overseas. In McNary's article http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117910572.html?categoryid=1011&cs=1&query=hollywood+bets+on+a+few+good+sports he cites that the baseball film The Rookie made $75 million in the United States, but only accrued $5 million overseas. Miracle and Seabiscuit had similar fates outside of America. This article was printed in 2004, but I don't think sports films have had much better luck in the past 4 years internationally. My question for everyone is why do you believe sports films can thrive in the United States? How can there be so many films about the same sport and still have successful runs at the box office? Also, why do you think sports films don't do as well overseas? Why would a film like Bend It Like Beckham have more popularity than a film like The Rookie? Why wouldn't a film like Miracle do well even though hockey is very popular internationally?
Just as an extra tidbit, I just found another article written by McNary about the Sports film genre on March 7, 2008. He claims that the recent "so-so" performance of Will Ferrell's sports film Semi-Pro is nothing to worry about for the sports film genre. The sports genre will pick back up again with the upcoming George Clooney film Leatherheads. Producers aren't giving up on the genre just yet. Just because there is a small dip in box office success recently, it will come back around. Do you agree? http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117982074.html?categoryid=1019&cs=1
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Media and Sports: a special relationship
Sports by it's self has a huge impact on our society and everyday lives. Add to that the power and influence that the media can bring and it's no wonder why Sports media is so influential. Sports Media is often thought of as only in the newspaper or magazine sense but books and films have just as much of an effect on sports fans everywhere. This study http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/impact-media-coverage-42nd-world-archery-championships-audience-attendance-and-purchases gives proof to the impact sports media has on the audiences that it attracts.
Personally for me the Sports film industry has had a huge impact on my sports interests. Many of the sports films I watched when I was little have shaped the sports fan that I am today. Books have had similar results with sports fans. The movie Rudy had a huge impact on my life, I've been a die hard Notre Dame fan ever since I saw the movie and always will be. A movie or a book can show a different side to a sports story or add more emotion to a story more than say a newspaper article or magazine article. Fans will read a particular book or see a certain film if their team is going to be featured in it. Chapter 19 of our handbook talks about how sports allegiances is strong motivation for sports viewing, "These team allegiances are at the core of the first motivation for sports viewing....."
So do you think that films and books have as Strong of an impact as the evidence suggests, do they have a strong influence on you. What do you think makes their influence on sports fans so strong.
Personally for me the Sports film industry has had a huge impact on my sports interests. Many of the sports films I watched when I was little have shaped the sports fan that I am today. Books have had similar results with sports fans. The movie Rudy had a huge impact on my life, I've been a die hard Notre Dame fan ever since I saw the movie and always will be. A movie or a book can show a different side to a sports story or add more emotion to a story more than say a newspaper article or magazine article. Fans will read a particular book or see a certain film if their team is going to be featured in it. Chapter 19 of our handbook talks about how sports allegiances is strong motivation for sports viewing, "These team allegiances are at the core of the first motivation for sports viewing....."
So do you think that films and books have as Strong of an impact as the evidence suggests, do they have a strong influence on you. What do you think makes their influence on sports fans so strong.
Monday, March 3, 2008
The Sports Hero Meets Mediated Celebrityhood - posted by Colleen Donovan
Wenner discuses the portrayal and perception of athletes as heroes in our society. He explains that our cultures perception of heroes embodies athletes. The historical hero is classified as someone who is viewed as a role model through public values and ideals. Mediated heroes “possess attributes of far less stature than did mythological heroes of ancient time.” So why have the qualifications of a hero changed over time? I truly believe that the media has an outstanding affect on how people view athletes. The media creates the hero, and brings out the qualities that the media knows the public can relate to. If you take the time to think about some of the athletic “heroes” that children look up to today you will notice that some lack the exceptional morality, social responsibility, and intellectual capabilities that the historical heroes contained. Are heroes representative of social values of their time; does heroic characteristics of the “culturally ideal” change with time? Suggested in the reading that “the individual athletes themselves are substantially less important than are the paths to achievement which athletes generically represent.” Are modern heroic athletes necessarily the best? Or are they recognized for their idealistic qualities seen because their athletic skills put them in the spotlight? If an athlete is lacking these idealistic qualities how does one determine if they are a hero or not? According to Smith “some antiheroes are rebels with causes, while others are dropouts convinced that society and human relationships are worthless.” “In some cases, an athlete may be regarded as a hero by some and an anti hero by others.” The last question I pose is do you think there is a difference between a sports hero, sports icon, and a sports celebrity? To me athletes are athletes, its what the media does with them, that makes the public form their heroic opinions.
Posted on behalf of Colleen Donovan
Posted on behalf of Colleen Donovan
Online Gambling: An Addictive Force
POSTED FOR SCOTT KOHLHEPP
As you get older, the language of football begins to change. As we’ve aged, no longer do we ask who we think the better player or better team is, we ask “what’s the spread?” or “you going over or under?” Many people find themselves waking up Sunday morning and rushing to their computer to look at the latest spreads. They justify how much they need to spend to either maximize profit or make a comeback off a shaky previous week.
"http://redding.com/news/2008/mar/02/when-the-chips-are-down/?partner=yahoo_headline
The article above deals mainly with gambling addicts. One of the people interviewed for the article (who chose not to be named) said “His free time is his Achilles heel…noting that his gambling addiction was fueled by online sports betting.” When you type in a search for “Online Sports Betting Sites” into google you get around 909,000 finds. These sites range from sportbet.com to sportsbook.com to wsex(World Sports Exchange).com. With a few credit card numbers, an individual can be online and betting on sports in mere seconds. Just a few clicks can mean a few hundred dollars either way.
In the Handbook of Sports and Media, Michael Real touches on the concept of online gambling. He cites that between 1997 and 2003, online gambling losses went from an estimated $300 million to between 3 and 6 billion dollars. He also states that a reported 5.6% of college students are pathological, unable to stop betting money online that they do not even have. He also goes on to state that up to 35% of student athletes were reported on gambling on sports, 5% of which bet on their own games, provided inside information, or even played poorly in exchange for money.
To further this, we are seeing problems on our campuses. Students with their first credit cards are maxing them out online by the making chronic bets. These sports betting sites are more then glad to take their money that they should be spending on food, gas, or textbooks. To further this, players are getting in on the action. The games we’re watching could be tainted by student athletes throwing the game for the right amount of $ or even for betting on the game itself.
The questions I pose are should we regulate online sports betting? How many students in this class use online betting sites? Has it been profitable? Also, should we raise the legal betting age to 21? With this, college kids who have credit cards in their own name would be regulated. Finally, should
Sunday, March 2, 2008
What defines a hero in our modern sports culture?
Sometimes it seems like the sports headlines constantly contain tales of which pro sports players have broken the law most recently, and it's hard to believe that there are still athletes who can be considered heroes. In the past year, Michael Vick was arrested for dog fighting, Adam 'Pacman' Jones was suspended for yet another transgression, and the Mitchell Report accused numerous baseball players of steroid and HGH use. Within the last week, Patriots' RB Kevin Faulk was arrested for marijuana possession (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=3266201). These are only a few examples.
In Mediasport, Leah R. Vande Berg gives examples of classic and modern sports heroes, and explains the influence of media in making heroes into celebrities. She says, "Nolan Ryan, Joe Montana, Michael Jordan, Dennis Rodman, and Tiger Woods all illustrate the impossibility of separating the hero from the celebrity..." This may be true of these sports figures, but I think the greater issue now is the media's focus on sports celebrities who aren't necessarily heroes.
For example, Tom Brady: talented quarterback, record-breaker, led his team to an almost undefeated season that culminated in the Super Bowl. Some may forget that he also had a baby with someone who is no longer his girlfriend. But, his image seems to remain unscathed and his celebrity status intact, even though these off the field activities are not exactly heroic.
Unfortunately, the media tends to focus too much on figures like Brady who are perceived as "heroes" because of their athletic ability. Vande Berg cites several sources who claim that the modern sports hero is granted this status not only for their athleticism, but also for their morality, social responsibility, moral character etc. This may also be true, but maybe not in the eyes of the media.
As an intern for NFLPLAYERS.com this Fall, I wrote a series of articles about a program called the Home Depot NFL Neighborhood MVP which honored NFL players who were standouts in their communities. Seventeen players were nominated and they each took part in building a playground or refurbishing a football field in their community. I talked to a number of the players, and wrote articles about the community involvement that earned each of them the title of Neighborhood MVP. I found out that there are a lot of players doing amazing things for their communities: helping single mothers become homeowners, working with children in need, volunteering in New Orleans, and giving money from their own pockets to worthy causes. I also realized that their aren't many articles about players like these who, some might argue, are the true heroes.
Is there a difference between being a hero and a celebrity in our modern sports culture? What effect has the media had in defining the concept of a hero? Do you think those who are considered heroes deserve the title?
In Mediasport, Leah R. Vande Berg gives examples of classic and modern sports heroes, and explains the influence of media in making heroes into celebrities. She says, "Nolan Ryan, Joe Montana, Michael Jordan, Dennis Rodman, and Tiger Woods all illustrate the impossibility of separating the hero from the celebrity..." This may be true of these sports figures, but I think the greater issue now is the media's focus on sports celebrities who aren't necessarily heroes.
For example, Tom Brady: talented quarterback, record-breaker, led his team to an almost undefeated season that culminated in the Super Bowl. Some may forget that he also had a baby with someone who is no longer his girlfriend. But, his image seems to remain unscathed and his celebrity status intact, even though these off the field activities are not exactly heroic.
Unfortunately, the media tends to focus too much on figures like Brady who are perceived as "heroes" because of their athletic ability. Vande Berg cites several sources who claim that the modern sports hero is granted this status not only for their athleticism, but also for their morality, social responsibility, moral character etc. This may also be true, but maybe not in the eyes of the media.
As an intern for NFLPLAYERS.com this Fall, I wrote a series of articles about a program called the Home Depot NFL Neighborhood MVP which honored NFL players who were standouts in their communities. Seventeen players were nominated and they each took part in building a playground or refurbishing a football field in their community. I talked to a number of the players, and wrote articles about the community involvement that earned each of them the title of Neighborhood MVP. I found out that there are a lot of players doing amazing things for their communities: helping single mothers become homeowners, working with children in need, volunteering in New Orleans, and giving money from their own pockets to worthy causes. I also realized that their aren't many articles about players like these who, some might argue, are the true heroes.
Is there a difference between being a hero and a celebrity in our modern sports culture? What effect has the media had in defining the concept of a hero? Do you think those who are considered heroes deserve the title?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)