Being chosen to host the Winter Olympic Games is an honor and a privilege. Like with any large and popular sporting event, there is a lot of money involved. With the influence of money and natural greed, competition to host the games becomes fierce and the potential for digressions multiply. This is the case of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake Utah. After winning the bid to host the games, it became known that the Salt Lake Organizing Committee had contributed to Olympic officials in the form of cash and property for favorable consideration. This led to a scandal about the practices of the IOC and how sites are chosen to host. The bribery scandal led to a shack up of the entire Olympic world.
The Difference between Lobbying and Bribery as it pertains to the 2002 Winter Olympics
When the International Olympic Committee awarded the 2002 Winter Games to Salt Lake City in June 1995, the people of Utah believed years of hard work and the state's investment in a winter sports facility had finally been recognized and rewarded. After all, Utah had been after the Winter Games for decades, spending more than fourteen million dollars on bid efforts alone. In addition, taxpayers had already agreed to spend almost sixty million dollars to construct Olympic venues, most of which had already been built or were in the process of being built when the bid winner was awarded.
Hoping to acquire the games, no other city in Olympic history had done more groundwork than Salt Lake City. The people of Utah were confident the Winter Games were coming to Salt Lake City in 2002 because of the quality of the state's winter sports facilities and because Utah has been known to hav...
... middle of paper ...
...uld not be held responsible for the acts of their representatives; unless it can be proven, they were aware, and supportive of the crimes.
Works Cited
Daley, K. (1999, January 21). Olympic Games: IOC report shows decades of bribery. The Idependent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympic-games-ioc-report-shows-decades-of-bribery-1075358.html
S.L. bid scandal leads to Olympic reforms . (2001). Retrieved from http://www.deseretnews.com/oly/view/0,3949,30000166,00.html
bribe. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bribe
differencebetween.net. (n.d.). http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/politics/difference-between-lobbying-and-bribing/
lobbying. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lobbying
The controversy in Berlin Olympic Games was that the some of the Jews excluded from the Olympic team were actually world class athletes. The athletes left Germany, along with other Jewish athletes, to resume their sports careers abroad.The Nazis also disqualified Gypsies.The Olympics were intended to be an exercise in goodwill among all nations emphasizing racial equality in the area of sports competition. But the Nazis thought that only the Aryans should participate in the Olympics games to represent Germany.Then after that controversy then the committee of the Games wanted to move the Olympic Games to another country.This was because usually the U.S. got the most medals because they sent the most athletes.
Since 776 BCE, the Olympics have been a way for people of different cultures to come together and compete in friendly competition. In 1892 the first modern Olympics were held in Athens, although it had been over a thousand years since the last game it still had brought together an assortment of different religions and ethnic groups together. Many factors shaping the Olympic Games reflect the changes that have taken place in our world since the last game in 393 CE in Greece such changes include woman’s suffrage, global economy, world wars, and proving competency.
Bribery has always been a controversial issue, especially in the business world. Many argue that bribes are a necessary cost of doing business while others view them with distain, claiming that they are antiquated and create an unfair advantage. In the late 90’s, the problem reached a boiling point. Although laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act made bribery illegal in the United States, it still remained an international issue. Numerous skeptics claimed that violators of the act slipped through loopholes and that the law was not properly enforced. This law only applied to the United States, but bribery had become a worldwide concern. In 1998, the International Anti-Bribery and Fair Competition Act was enacted. The Act became law on November 10, 1998, however; it did not take effect until May 1, 1999.
As the base of this essay is on how the Olympics have been used in the
The General assembly has only two options to vote, while following the rules that they were given (“Bautista” para. 3). The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has exposed and expelled any scandal that wasn't good, and got to determine the future locations of the games (“Bautista” para. 1). Over six permanent members of the organization of (IOC), was said to have committed crimes, when grant the olympics to Salt Lake City, causing permanent expulsion (“Bautista” para. 2). If they look in the tangled web of bribery within the (IOC) they will see that they throw out the old elements (“Bautista” para.5). During the 2006 winter olympics site, there was a trial basis that was held for a few months,that will also be put to test during that 2006 year olympic site (“Bautista” para. 3).
Close, Paul, David Askew, and Xin Xu. The Beijing Olympics the Political Economy of a Sporting Mega-event.. Hoboken: Taylor & Francis, 2006.. 34-35
It was estimated that the Olympic Games 2012 would involve more than 11,000 athletes and officials, 1 million visitors from around the world, and 4 billion television audiences, or more. Therefore, it was important to ensure that the Games preparations were ready on time, delivered high standard sports facilities to the sports professionals while controlled spending within budget.
The Olympics were originally created with the intention of creating an international community of peace. As stated in document 1 and 6 the Olympics were supposed to become “the true free trade of the future.” This means that through the Olympics, peace would become international, similar to peace created by free trade. Similarly, document 6 describes that the ****** promulgated by the Olympic Games are those of peaceful foreign policy, democracy, and social progress. In the document, the Soviets write that they have been chosen as hosts because they retain an ideal peace, which is the ****** of the Olympics. Documents 1’s author, the creator of the Olympics is a reliable source because it describes what the actual innovator ****** for the Olympics. However, document 6 may not be a reliable source. This is because during the 1980’s the USSR was a communist country. The supposed “peaceful foreign policy” and “democracy” described in the document is not characteristic of the USSR in that ******. In fact, the USSR was en...
Since the first Olympic Games in 1896 winning the Olympics meant more than just a medal, it showed the power that the winning country possesses. Although the Olympics are meant to show peaceful amiability between all counties, geopolitics is still a factor in the Olympics. The International Olympic Committee President states “sport can only contribute to development and peace if it’s not used as a stage for political contest, have the courage to address your disagreements in a peaceful direct political dialogue and not on the backs of athletes.” Many historians ask if geopolitics was a factor in the Olympics during the Cold War era. The answer isn’t an opinion; geopolitics has never been absent in the Olympics and that is especially true for the Cold War. The Cold War was a battle for political power that will dominates the rest of the world. The idea that this was a battle for power explains the arms race, Korean War, Vietnam War and the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. Logically, this need to upstage the opposing super power leaked into international sports competition. With all this competition whirling around during the Cold War, the Olympics became a literal race against communism or democracy. As geopolitics played such a major role in the Olympics during the Cold War era, athletes’ fates were ultimately altered.
The phenomenon was mainly caused by a dramatic investment increase or excessive social and psychological expected at the pre-Olympic stage. Normally, it will lead to a waste of infrastructure, facilities idle, the Olympic host city real estate prices fell, and the stock market fell, in part or in overall economic growth slow down after the Olympic Games. According Josh Sanbum’s report “For years, studies have shown that holding the Olympics often has severe negative economic effects on host cities, despite the temporary burst of tourism and global attention. The competition between cities often causes governments to go financially overboard merely to win an Olympic bid. Once construction gets under way, governments often fail to budget properly. And after the Games are over, many cities are left with infrastructure that suddenly has no real use.” (2012).That shows the Olympic Games often has serious negative economic effects on host
We are able to see that hosting the Olympics plays an important role in the development of a country. Despite having a number of valid reasons to oppose the hosting of Olympics, we are able to reap more long-term benefits. Rebranding the country to make it outstanding enough to attract tourist and boost tourism head on. For this reason, it brings in more income for the country and creates more job opportunities in the tourism sector. This would indirectly create job chances in industrial sector. Unemployment rate goes down significantly which are able to attract more people towards the country. Citizens will be more patriotic and not wanting to leave the country. There is so much potential for a country to improve themselves, with all being said, I couldn’t disagree with hosting the
During the Renaissance, Europe became fascinated with ancient Greek culture, and some staged sporting and folkloric festivals using the name “Olympic Games.” It wasn’t until 1892 that Pierre de Coubertin proposed the idea that the Olympics should be a major international competition that would occur every four years. Coubertin raised the idea again at the conference on international competition in Paris in June 1894 in front of 79 delegates who unanimously approved his proposal. The international Olympic Committee (IOC) was formed, and the first games were planned for Athens in 1896.
In every major sports event, like the FIFA World Cup or the Olympics, there’s always a huge celebration and a positive vibes surrounding such events. Hosting these events are usually a great honor to the selected countries and bring a lot of favorable consequences with it. However, no one realized that whenever these big sporting events occur and are hosted, brings as much negative consequences which counterbalances all the good things that comes with it. So, the question remains, is the Olympics a Cash Cow or a Money Pit to the hosting countries? In my opinion, the Olympics could actually bring more benefit that loss to the selected countries to host it, which are to bring positive economic and cultural benefits, either a Legacy or a Money pit for the hosting countries, hosting this event could promote development for the educational legacy and finally eradicating poverty throughout the citizens.
In conclusion, either way you look at it the Olympics has its pros and cons when it comes around. Having the Olympics move each year has not really been considered a problem till recent years. Many people want to stick with the tradition and allow other countries host the Olympics, but other want it to remain in one permanent spot. Either way you go we will still have the pleasure having seeing the best athletes in the world compete against each other and represent their
... some sort of political intention. The extent of the connection between politics and the Modern Olympics was not intended. Countries boycott particular Games in order to send a political message to the hosting country or any country attending the Games. Increased publicity on the hosting country can bring up political issues causing countries to boycott the Games. Throughout the years groups of people were kept from participating in the Games based on who was hosting the Games. Both the Ancient and the Modern Olympics were created with the intention of having some political connections, although Pierre de Coubertin could never have imagined just how much politics are involved in the Olympics today. They Olympics will continue to be infected with politics because countries have seen firsthand the political advantages that come with hosting the Olympic Games.