Banned from the Olympics

The press helped garner advertiser interest early on from the likes of Kodak and Coca-Cola. Before long, advertisers would surpass wealthy patrons as the main source of support for the games, and the IOC, a nonprofit organisation, no longer had to worry about finding funds to stage the Games every four years.

TV has been the biggest boon for the games, though it took some time to catch on. In 1948, the Games' organisers reached a landmark agreement with the British Broadcasting Corp. The BBC agreed to pay the equivalent of US$3,000 to televise the 1948 Olympics, establishing the concept of rights fees. (To avoid inflicting financial hardship on the BBC, the British Olympic committee never cashed the cheque.) The 1956 Winter Games in Cortina D'Ampezzo, Italy, carried the first live TV feed. But IOC traditionalists, expressing the same type of resistance to change that has re-emerged today, were unimpressed. Former IOC President Avery Brundage commented at the time: "We in IOC have done well without TV for 60 years and will do so certainly for the next 60 years, too."

Brundage couldn't have been more wrong. Beginning with the 1960 Games in Rome, TV has fundamentally changed the way the Olympics are viewed. And TV-rights fees are now the single biggest source of revenue for the IOC. But it wasn't until the '80s that the organisers figured out how to turn a profit on the Games. The 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles kicked off the era of hyper-commercialisation - and big profits. In subsequent years, a worldwide sponsorship program was developed, and the IOC's coffers began to overflow with corporate dollars. Suddenly, the "Olympic Movement," a term coined in 1894 to describe the need for promoting the unifying nature of a global sports, became synonymous with the big business of staging the most commercialised event in the world. The Sydney Games are predicted to generate $8.58 billion for the host city and the surrounding economy of the New South Wales region of Australia alone.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Bernhard Warner

PC World

Comments

Comments are now closed.

Latest News Articles

Most Popular Articles

Follow Us

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Resources

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?