I have said this once: The Olympic Committee has a budget that is bigger than many nations' budgets. They can afford not to be for-profit. The same goes for other organizations. And some statements are pure intellectual arrogance. Best, Nuno Garcia On 5 July 2012 23:16, Joly MacFie <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > 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 > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - >