Monday, February 10, 2014

Social Injustice in Sochi

            According to Tomlinson and Young (2006), a global sports mega event is one that globally involves the majority of the nations in the world and includes large amounts of spectators. One current event in particular is the highly anticipated 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. The core principle of the Olympic games has always been to promote international harmony and universal peace through joyful competition of sport (King, 2014). Although sport is the main focus for the Olympics, politics and economy have a significant role in global sport. This relationship between politics and economics has developed power chances among countries, corporations, and people involved in global sport. One particular social justice that has spawned from the Winter Olympics in Sochi is the anti gay laws that target the LGBT community.
To further understand the social injustice, the process sociology theory will be used to analyze power relations. The process sociology focuses that people are all connected in a network or figuration, and that everybody influences each other intentionally and discreetly (Maguire, 1994). These power relations are constructed from these figurations, which allow certain groups or individuals to influence others. The power relations created further establish who is constrained and who is enabled. In the context of the Winter Olympics, Russian president Vladimir Putin and the Russian government signify the enabled and privileged groups with greater power chances. For Vladimir Putin, hosting the Olympic games is an opportunity to show the rest of the world how powerful the country and its leader are (Tomlinson & Young, 2006). The use of a GSME has been used to assert particular national ideology and reinforce national, cultural, and racial stereotypes (Tomlinson & Young, 2006). This has been more evident with the passing of anti gay propaganda laws by the Russian government, in preparation for the Winter Games. Although homosexuality was decriminalized in 1993, anti-gay emotion still exists, which continues to reinforce the status quo.
With all of the power chances being driven towards Vladimir Putin and the Russian government, why are the Olympics continued to go on in a country that condones the persecution of the LGBT community? Under Principle 6 of the Olympic Charter states that “Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or other is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement” (IOC, 2013). It is clear and evident that the International Olympic Committee enables persecution of the LGBT community. Instead of making an effort to show that the discrimination by the Russian government is against the Olympic ideal, and defend human rights, IOC president Thomas Bach criticizes leaders who want to boycott the Olympics (Wilstein, 2014). President Bach claims that the games should not be used as a medium to promote a country’s political agenda. President Bach continues that athletes should not protest the issue at the medal podium but rather during press conferences to make a political statement (King, 2014). This shows that the IOC has little influence in changing how Russia views homosexuality and further reinforces the power chances held by Putin and the oppression allowed by the IOC.
The question that comes up is why doesn’t the IOC act and do something about it? They are in a prime position to say that the host country is does not embody the essence of the Olympic games. Is Vladimir Putin’s influence that strong on the games? Further examination of the IOC’s failure to uphold the principles of the games can be seen with the economic impact of GSME. As previously mentioned, global sport is affected by both politics and the economy (Tomlinson & Young, 2006). The Olympics has become a venue for global marketing opportunities by multinational corporations such as Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, and Visa (Tomlinson & Young, 2006). These corporations are major contributors to the success of the games yet do not seek to stand up against Russia’s oppression of the LGBT community. These transnational corporations, who provide tens of millions into the games, fear that any support on the topic will be met with backlash from consumers (Davison, 2014). The potential boycott of their product by consumers at the games does not seem to outweigh the short terms gains by speaking out against the social injustice. By remaining quiet, these corporations can continue to exist at the Olympic games so that they can continue selling their product.
The LGBT communities in Russia are faced with continued discrimination, violence, and persecution (Gibson & Walker, 2014). Through the emphasis of the power balances between politics and the economy, the issues of the LGBT community get forgotten. This highlights how members within a figuration allow the status quo to continue and how some members in the figuration turn a blind eye to what is happening.
Social change is difficult and it will continue to be controlled by the people in power. Vladimir Putin’s stance against the LGBT community is evident, but growing awareness is out there. The Humans Rights Watch has been a strong advocate in bringing to light the social injustices that are occurring in Russia. Still a combined effort from the IOC, corporations, athletes, and public opinion leaders are needed in order to break cycle of injustice.



Davison, J. (2014). Big Olympic sponsors tread softly around Russia’s anti-gay law. Available: http://www.cbc.ca/news/big-olympic-sponsors-tread-softly-around-russia-s-anti-gay-law-1.2526092. Retrieved 10th February, 2014.
King, B. (2014). 17 days in Sochi: The Olympics and social justice. Available: http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/02/06/271093846/17-days-in-sochi-the-olympics-and-social-justice. Retrieved 8th February, 2014.
Gibson, O., and Walker, S. (2014). Ban Ki-moon condemns persecution of gay people in Russia. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/06/sochi-olympics-ban-ki-moon-lgbt-prejudice. Retrieved 9th February, 2014.
Maguire, J. (1994). Figurations, power, civilizing processes. In Jarvie, G & Maguire, J (1994). Sport & Leisure in Social Thought. London: Routledge, Pp 130-137.
Tomlinson A. and Young C. (2006). National identity and global sports events.  pp 5-7)

Wilstein, M. (2014). Here’s the anti-discrimination message NBC cut fom Sochi opening ceremony. Avaialbe: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/heres-the-anti-discrimination-message-nbc-cut-from-sochi-opening-ceremony/.  Retrieved 9th February, 2014.


3 comments:

  1. Your idea that transnational corporations are implicit in the occurrence of social injustices is eye-opening for me. In my mind I had separated them, not thinking about them because they are only interested in money and advertising. Do TNC's have the ability to positively change the status quo?
    - Brett

    ReplyDelete
  2. Transnational corporations are at a prime position to influence social injustices. Although no major contributing TNC's have taken a clear stance on the issue, American company AT&T, who sponsors the US Olympic team but not the IOC, has condemned Russia's anti-gay laws (USAToday, 2014). Through recommendations form the Human Rights Watch, who called for international sponsors to stand up for the LGBT community, AT&T took charge by supporting human rights.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Some thoughtful observations Vince- in your next blog, I would like you to try to avoid the ProSoc "mantra" and have a go at applying this framework using your own words (I will not penalize you for this- I want to get to your core understanding of these concepts). I am interested n your thoughts on your following statement " President Bach claims that the games should not be used as a medium to promote a country’s political agenda. President Bach continues that athletes should not protest the issue at the medal podium but rather during press conferences to make a political statement (King, 2014). This shows that the IOC has little influence in changing how Russia views homosexuality and further reinforces the power chances held by Putin and the oppression allowed by the IOC."- do you think the IOC's inaction is down to little influence OR could it be explained by the IOC reaping benefits from its silence and continued reinforcement of the apolitical myth? Killick

    ReplyDelete