Last edited by a moderator:
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
2016 Rio Olympics on NBC
- Thread starter mvcg66b3r
- Start date
The IOC should not have awarded the Olympics to Rio. It's not about Zika, that couldn't have been foreseen. Rio has other, significant health issues including a failure to even provide basic treatment for most sewage. I think there will be many problems down there over and above those that Zika might create.
Like any pregnant mom I can't really blame her for not wanting to take that risk.
The Olympics have been controversial in Brazil from the get go. The country has a lot of poor people and a lot of social problems. Most voters would have preferred these billions be spent addressing those problems rather than building stadiums and other venues.
A couple of weeks ago the World Health Organization recommended that the Olympics be moved or postponed.
I can't see that happening. If they get yanked away from Brazil after the government defied their own people to prepare for it, all heck is gonna break loose.
The Olympics have been controversial in Brazil from the get go. The country has a lot of poor people and a lot of social problems. Most voters would have preferred these billions be spent addressing those problems rather than building stadiums and other venues.
A couple of weeks ago the World Health Organization recommended that the Olympics be moved or postponed.
I can't see that happening. If they get yanked away from Brazil after the government defied their own people to prepare for it, all heck is gonna break loose.
And think of the give-backs and make-goods the television rightsholders will have to appease their advertisers with! (mock horror)
She gets her dream job, after pushing out Ann Curry. Then she decides to have a baby. Then she uses that as an excuse to turn down an assignment. When the time comes, she expects to take time off. All because she thinks she's entitled to "have it all." Equal pay for equal work? Don't see anything resembling equal work here.
American network coverage of the Games have been terrible. Too much fluff and backstories on the (mostly American) participants and not enough actual competition coverage. But I gave up watching most of it after the tragedy of 1972. Just not worth it.
Deciding to have a baby. How dare she!
I'm not particularly a fan of Guthrie, but it's inaccurate to say that she pushed Ann Curry out. From everything I've read, it was producer Jim Bell who pushed Curry out, with help from Matt Lauer, who was not a Curry fan. Now, you can say that Guthrie was waiting in the wings, and perfectly happy to replace Curry - that's called ambition.
As for her decision not to risk getting Zika, and possibly having a baby who would be profoundly handicapped by microcephaly - I'd call that a smart move. NBC certainly has a deep bench of non-pregnant reporters and anchors to send to Rio.
It does seem to get audience numbers and - more importantly - advertisers love it. But I don't get it myself. I don't know about every country, but Canadian coverage also seems driven by nationalism - and root, root, root for the home team.
Athletes are now starting to decide that they are skipping Rio for fear of Zika.
Not all of them female either.
Not all of them female either.
The US tends to be the only country where the concepts of "fairness" and journalistic neutrality preclude, to a noticeable extent, nationalism. Generally speaking, in the rest of the world (and even in Puerto Rico, USA, which fields its own Olympic team) the "home team" is openly championed in the media coverage.
Most Brazilians wanted both the World Cup in 2014 and the Olympics this year. They are a source of national pride, and the promotion of tourism, sponsorships, etc., cover much of the cost. The big change is the Zika virus, which will limit tourism and devalue the local revenue generating aspects of the tournament.
The government did not defy its own people. Polls taken in Brazil at the time the Olympic Committee gave the 2016 event to that nation were overwhelmingly positive; it's one of the few cases where people have taken to the streets to celebrate!
Given all the problems in Brazil, including widespread poverty, it is inexplicable that people suffering would want an event that disrupts their lives and does little beyond making some rich people richer. But this country is no different. People who object to welfare, public radio, universal health care or almost anything that involves public spending are demand to have stadia built at public expense for the benefit of rich team owners, charging more for tickets than most people can afford. Big time sports is a disease.
The Rio Olympics was set up to be "self-liquidating" and paid for from the taxes on tourist dollars, domestic ticket sales, wages and salaries, construction company profits, value added taxes and the shared revenues from future usage of the facilities built or improved for the Olympics.
When Rio was given the Olympics, Brazil had perhaps the fastest growing middle class in the world and the second most powerful economy in the Western Hemisphere.
One of the stated purposes of the project was to give tens of thousands of jobs to the underemployed.
And except for a few highly developed nations, there is, buy US standards, widespread poverty everywhere on the planet. Brazil's intention was to use projects like the Olympics to improve the infrastructure, recreational facilities and to create jobs.
Two things happened in the interim: the democratic socialist government drove the country into a steep depression and the Zika epidemic made tourism less attractive. Neither could have been accurately predicted (although the fiscal policies stopped working when the government ran out of people it could take money from in order to give it to others).
Sporting events are reasonably priced in Brazil and attended by all levels of society. Much of Brazil's national identity is based on its soccer teams. Brazil is the most successful national team in the history of the World Cup, having won five titles, earning second-place, third-place and fourth-place finishes twice each. Sports and sporting events are a big part of the soul of the country.
I have to ask: have you ever lived or worked in Brazil?
Last edited:
She's 44, which certainly explains why she's having this child so soon after her first. Can't begrudge her wanting to have a family. And yes, NBC has more than enough pretty/handsome faces to send to Rio to do stand-ups outside the venues.
I understand how this Olympics was set up. Most are set up with similar intentions. Most don't work out that way.
My comment about affordability was in a sentence about public financing of sports stadia in the US.
My comment about affordability was in a sentence about public financing of sports stadia in the US.
Isn't Montreal still paying off their Olympics?
No, Montreal paid their debt years ago, but it was a big money loser for them. In fact, the financial performance of those games led to next to no one bidding for the '84 games which LA won. The LA Olympics shifted the business paradigm. Under Peter Uberroth's competent leadership, the Games turned a profit and restored the Games luster making the bidding for the Games highly competitive once again.
Greece took on way too much debt, far more than it could handle for the 2004 Olympics. I don't think Rio will be able to handle the Olympics without a lot of problems. It's not that Brazilians aren't smart or capable, but Rio simply lacks the necessary infrastructure to handle Olympics in the modern age. Athens needed a lot of help, Rio doesn't seem to be getting as much. The water quality issue is a big deal. As I wrote, Zika couldn't be foreseen, and will be dealt with by liberally spreading pesticides until the Games and then throughout the events, but transportation and water will be issues.
I hope all goes well and that the jobs and money that flow in do help people there, that Brazil isn't left with debt, and the venues built for the Games lead to more tourism for the region. While I hope that, I'm not confident that will be how it plays out. IMO, if the IOC wants to hold the Games in less developed areas, it needs to restore some simplicity to the Games, and I'm not sure that's possible at this point.
In any case, I'll be watching and cheering Team USA on in August.
Greece took on way too much debt, far more than it could handle for the 2004 Olympics. I don't think Rio will be able to handle the Olympics without a lot of problems. It's not that Brazilians aren't smart or capable, but Rio simply lacks the necessary infrastructure to handle Olympics in the modern age. Athens needed a lot of help, Rio doesn't seem to be getting as much. The water quality issue is a big deal. As I wrote, Zika couldn't be foreseen, and will be dealt with by liberally spreading pesticides until the Games and then throughout the events, but transportation and water will be issues.
I hope all goes well and that the jobs and money that flow in do help people there, that Brazil isn't left with debt, and the venues built for the Games lead to more tourism for the region. While I hope that, I'm not confident that will be how it plays out. IMO, if the IOC wants to hold the Games in less developed areas, it needs to restore some simplicity to the Games, and I'm not sure that's possible at this point.
In any case, I'll be watching and cheering Team USA on in August.
Kotb is single and 51. Vieira is married and 62. Neither would appear to have reason to fear Zika.
- Status