But you are not disputing their facts, I take it. j On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Michael Carson <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > Alain, > > > > I agree. This op-ed is just that - the opinion of two individuals. > > Michael Carson > > YMCA of the USA > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Alain Berranger" <[log in to unmask]> > *To: *[log in to unmask] > *Sent: *Thursday, July 5, 2012 3:55:09 PM > *Subject: *Re: NYTimes: International Olympic Committee - "elitist, > domineering, and crassly commercial at its core" > > > NPOC really welcomes national Olympic committees as Members because they > are true notforprofit organizations... > > Alain > > On Thursday, July 5, 2012, Robin Gross wrote: > >> As a commercial organization that tried to join NCSG, very relevant… >> >> No Medal for the International Olympic Committee says the New York >> Times….. >> >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/opinion/no-medal-for-the-international-olympic-committee.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> July 4, 2012 >> **Olympian Arrogance**** By JULES BOYKOFF and ALAN TOMLINSON**** >> **** >> >> Brighton, England >> >> WHILE Europe roils in economic turmoil, London is preparing for a lavish >> jamboree of international good will: in a few weeks, the city will host the >> 2012 Summer Olympics. >> >> But behind the spectacle of athletic prowess and global harmony, >> brass-knuckle politics and brute economics reign. At this nexus sits theInternational >> Olympic Committee <http://www.olympic.org/>, which promotes the games >> and decides where they will be held. Though the I.O.C. has been >> periodically tarnished by scandal — usually involving the bribing and >> illegitimate wooing of delegates — those embarrassments divert us from a >> deeper problem: the organization is elitist, domineering and crassly >> commercial at its core. >> >> The I.O.C., which champions itself as a democratic “catalyst for >> collaboration between all parties of the Olympic family,” is nonetheless >> run by a privileged sliver of the global 1 percent. This has always been >> the case: when Baron Pierre de Coubertin revived the Olympics in the 1890s, >> he assembled a hodgepodge of princes, barons, counts and lords to >> coordinate the games. Eventually the I.O.C. opened its hallowed halls to >> wealthy business leaders and former Olympians. Not until 1981 were women >> allowed in. >> >> Even today, royalty make up a disproportionate share of the body; among >> the 105 I.O.C. members<http://www.olympic.org/content/the-ioc/the-ioc-institution1/ioc-members-list/> are >> the likes of Princess Nora of Liechtenstein, Crown Prince Frederik of >> Denmark and Prince Nawaf Faisal Fahd Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia. The United >> States has only three representatives, two of them former Olympic athletes. >> >> Then there are the excessive demands that the I.O.C. makes on host >> cities. For instance, the host cities have had to change their laws to >> comply with the Olympic Charter<http://www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf>, >> which states that “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or >> racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other >> areas.” When Vancouver, British Columbia, hosted the Winter Games in 2010, >> the city passed a bylaw that outlawed signs and banners that did not >> “celebrate” the Olympics. Placards that criticized the Olympics were >> forbidden, and the law even empowered Canadian authorities to remove such >> signs from private property. >> >> The I.O.C. also makes host cities police Olympics-related intellectual >> property rights. So Parliament adopted the London Olympic Games and >> Paralympic Games Act of 2006<http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/12/contents>, >> which defines as a trademark infringement the commercial use of words like >> “games,” “2012” and “London” in proximity. >> >> Such monomaniacal brand micromanagement points to another problem: the >> I.O.C. has turned the Olympics into a commercial bonanza. In London, more >> than 250 miles of V.I.P. traffic lanes are reserved not just for athletes >> and I.O.C. luminaries but also for corporate sponsors. Even the signature >> torch relay has been commercialized: the I.O.C. and its corporate partners >> snapped up 10 percent of the torchbearer slots for I.O.C. stakeholders and >> members of the commercial sponsors’ information technology and marketing >> staffs. Michael R. Payne, a former marketing director for the committee, >> has called the Olympics “the world’s longest commercial.” >> >> Most worrisome, perhaps, is that the I.O.C. creates perverse incentives >> for security officials in host cities to overspend and to militarize public >> space. The I.O.C. tends to look kindly on bids that assure security, and >> host cities too often use the games as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to >> stock police warehouses with the best weapons money can buy. >> >> Visitors to London, where the games are scheduled to run from July 27 to >> Aug. 12, would be forgiven for thinking they had dropped in on a military >> hardware convention. Helicopters, fighter jets and bomb-disposal units will >> be at the ready. About 13,500 British military personnel will be on patrol >> — 4,000 more than are currently serving in Afghanistan. Security officials >> have acquired Starstreak and Rapier surface-to-air missiles. Even the >> Olympic mascots look like two-legged surveillance cameras. >> >> Let us be clear: the concern about ensuring a terror-free Olympics is >> tragically warranted. In 1972, members of the Palestinian militant group >> Black September killed 11 Israeli athletes and coaches at the Olympics in >> Munich — after which the I.O.C. president notoriously insisted that “the >> games must go on” — and in 1996, a bomb at the Atlanta Olympics killed a >> spectator and injured more than 100 other people. Yet there is such a thing >> as excess — and surveillance and weaponry are not a panacea. >> >> Security measures can also be counterproductive: London residents who >> learned that the Ministry of Defense was attaching missile launchers to the >> roofs of their apartment buildings can’t be blamed for wondering if they’ve >> unwillingly become a prime target for terrorists. And, symbolically, at a >> certain point it gets hard to square the image of the militarized state >> with the Olympic ideals of peace and understanding. >> >> What can be done? The I.O.C. has acknowledged that the escalating scale >> of the games — “gigantism” — is a real issue. Competitions drenched in >> privilege, like the equestrian events, should be ditched (with apologies to >> Ann Romney’s horse Rafalca, who will be competing in dressage in London). >> Pseudo-historical events like Greco-Roman wrestling, concocted in the 19th >> century, could also go. Events with high start-up costs could be swapped >> for those requiring fewer resources. Why not bring back tug-of-war (a hotly >> contested event in the early 20th century) and add more running events, >> like trail running and cross-country? >> >> Governance is another challenge. After the bribery scandal surrounding >> the selection of Salt Lake City to host the 2002 Winter Olympics, and under >> pressure from Congress, the I.O.C. created an ethics commission to monitor >> the bid process — but it reports to the I.O.C.’s executive board, which >> still has the final say. >> >> Other measures worth considering are to streamline committee membership >> and to provide greater representation for the international sports >> federations that administer athletic competitions — though either approach >> would continue to pose accountability problems. >> >> In these bleak economic times, the world could use a little athletic >> transcendence. Sadly, the arrogance and aloofness of the organization >> behind the spectacle are all too ordinary. >> ** >> Jules Boykoff<http://www.pacificu.edu/as/politics/faculty/jules-boykoff.cfm/>, >> an associate professor of political science at Pacific University, is >> writing a book on dissent and the Olympics. Alan Tomlinson<http://alantomlinson.typepad.com/> is >> a professor of leisure studies at the University of Brighton. >> **** >> ****** >> ** >> MORE IN OPINION (2 OF 19 ARTICLES) Op-Ed Columnist: Doughnuts >> Defeating Poverty<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/opinion/doughnuts-defeating-poverty.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fopinion%2Findex.jsonp> >> >> Read More »<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/opinion/doughnuts-defeating-poverty.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fopinion%2Findex.jsonp> >> Close >> >> >> > > -- > Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA > Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/> > Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca > Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org > NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org > Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/ > O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824 > Skype: alain.berranger > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -