The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Sport: the great Australian double standard > Comments

Sport: the great Australian double standard : Comments

By Saul Eslake, published 26/9/2005

Saul Eslake examines the discrepancy of funding between sports and the arts.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Dear Saul,

You are on the right track. It's all about "give them bread and circuses." These are the modern Roman Empire's gladiator fights. Politicians love events like the Olympics because it distracts the common people from the ruin politicians visit on the country.

I disagree there is nothing wrong with public funding of (professional) sport. It is a disgrace. It is worthy of criminal charges when there is wastage of billions of dollars of public funds on useless circuses like the Olympics and other pro sports.

Media moguls also like sport, because they agree with the principle of "give them bread and circuses" (corporate purchasing of politicians is a goal) and it's dirt cheap. They don't need to spend money on any real journalism or TV broadcasting.
Posted by ConspiracyTheory, Monday, 26 September 2005 11:33:17 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When Australia lost ashes it prompted me to think about the role that sport plays in Australia and particularly how we project ourselves onto the international scene. I agree with Saul in that I am a sports fan, but should we continue to seek world domination in sport? We have spent a lot of money and got a lot in return; however, that does not mean that if we double the amount spent we will get double the results, the law of diminishing returns must set in. Also if England really want to they could dominate cricket, rugby or netball, they have more people and money than us. For that matter so could India.
I feel that last Century we have used cricket to inflict some power over England, we could not do it diplomatically and in the two world Wars our forces were usually under British Control. The same with the USA, they dominated our War effort in WW2 and dominate our current foreign policy but we used to get back at them through tennis and sailing; although the Europeans have taken those over in recent times.
Over the next 50 years Australia must focus on excellence in other spheres, education,science and industry. We are not world leaders in these areas, but will need to be or somewhere near it.
In the movie the "fog of war" RS McNamara said that "none of our allies supported us in Vietnam" I was surprised as I thought that Australia did, but it occured to me that we are not a US ally we are a client State. To be a real ally will take committment on a number of fronts. Sport won't do it.
Posted by terryg, Monday, 26 September 2005 4:42:34 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When as many people tune in to watch opera as watched the AFL grand final or the NRL grand final or the Olympics, then maybe you might get some funding.

Till then, try climbing down from your ivory towers, taking the silver spoons out of your mouths and joining the rest of us in the real world.

This article is typical of the latte sipping Left and why they fa il to connect with real people at elections.
Posted by Brent, Monday, 26 September 2005 4:45:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Surely the most logical and fair thing to do would be to eliminate all taxpayer funding of both sport and the arts. Leave it all to the market.

Being realistic, neither sport nor art is as critical to our daily lives as transport, water, communications, electricity etc., are they? But we happily encourage the government to donate to the private sector our birthright in roads, airports, telephone lines and power suppliers, don't we?

Let's have a little consistency here, people. Cut funding to sport and the arts, build some dams and roads, why don't we?

Market-driven sport will in any event be pretty much as we see it now, with the difference that the minor sports (read: uncommercial) will become even more marginalized, and have to be funded entirely by the participants themselves. There will be a tad more product placement and a tad less personal involvement, but otherwise, business as usual.

And the arts... what will happen to them?

The big events such as opera, symphony concerts and to some extent theatre will continue, but perhaps a little leaner and meaner. Oddball projects will pretty well disappear, except those that can be gathered together under the banner of a sponsored "culture festival".

Let's face it, the biggest difference of all will be that the masses of hangers-on, who currently have their little snouts firmly in the seemingly bottomless trough of our money, will disappear. Armies of administrators and consultants will fade into the unemployable queue, leaving the field open for the real sportspeople, and the real artists. Abolishing the Arts Council would be a highly productive start.

Bring it on.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 26 September 2005 5:12:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'The latte sipping left'
Haha, I love this guy!

I think you've got the cart before the horse, Brent. With more funding and more visibility, various arts would get a lot more attention.

If you picture the opera when you picture 'the arts', then you have a very close minded view on the subject. Did you know (gasp) that the arts include things like TV dramas and comedy??

Who do you think, seriously, over history, has contributed more to society? Artists or sportspeople? Remember, artists include, but are not limited to: painters, writers, directors, musicians (and drummers), actors, comedians, sculptures, poets, dancers and photographers.

Artists create philosophies, politics, develop cultural ideals, and so on.

Sportspeople hawk deodorant.

Ok, a few artists lend their name to a product too, but they don't count as artists once they've done that. That's a different issue. Am I rambling? I'm bored. Night everybody.
Posted by spendocrat, Monday, 26 September 2005 5:15:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
spendocrat, etc , please don't dismiss sport, it's uplifting and exciting for red blooded Australians and healthy for kids and most participants . those public funded role models can make a positive difference .
A possible gold medal for Rupert and the VB ceo , you are joking ! how much untied money have they given to sport and the health of our nation ??
Posted by kartiya, Monday, 26 September 2005 9:42:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One sport which receives no govt funding whatsoever [as far as I am aware] is ballroom dancing. Yet Australia regularly produces world class dancers, in various categories. Those people who represent Australia at top level, often overseas, do so at their own expense. They usually start as young teenagers and have no income, so the very considerable cost is borne by their parents and subsidised by fund raising events and raffles.

Some people may regard this kind of dancing as art rather than sport and some may dismiss it altogether. Yet those who wish to excel, at top national or international level, are dedicated athletes in every sense of the word.
Posted by Rex, Monday, 26 September 2005 11:01:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Yarts get quite a bit of funding - the opera, the symphony orchestras, writers, pitcha painters and others; if you listen to some they get too much.

The accolades afforded to sports people via the Austrlian of the year is reflective of our cult of the celebrity addiction - if most of our actors werent resident overseas they'd probably get the gong.

And another thing ! If 8% of the gongs went to sports people over all what percentage went to medical practitioners/members of the legal fraternity - methinks a hellava lot more - I might even be moved to go back and add them up

Sport actually offers us as much as any other pursuit - maybe more: we get entertained, diverted, motivated, some get fitter , some get employment and others get imbued with national proid - it offers us a lot.

Easlakes observation that the private sector spends more on sport than the yarts is note worthy; the private sector get more out of sport than the yarts; they get tickets! and lots of them! and they get corporate exposure on a grand scale.

Their has never been a particualrly altruistic or visionarly thread in the Australian private sector traditionally it has focused on short term selfish gains - investment in R and D has always been limp and half hearted; the only real cultural cringe remaining in this nation is vested deep in the hearts of the captains of Australian industry who think all the good ideas come from over seas - and that includes the yarts.

The Yarts does alright Saul except when it comes to relevance in the Australian psyche.
Posted by sneekeepete, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 9:09:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with Saul about the undue prominance given to sporting people. His analysis of their share of AOs and other awards was very interesting. If you add to them the number of those who get awards for simply doing their job public servants, police, military etc you will see that our award system is overlooking many great contributors to our community.
Posted by pablo, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 10:43:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Brent,

What about this:

"ABS surveys for 1995 showed that 8 146 800 people visited a museum, art gallery or library in 1995, compared with 3 730 700 who attended all football codes and 1 165 900 who went to cricket matches."
Posted by solomon, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 1:32:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Excellent work solomon! A very heartening statistic, there’s life and creativity in society still.

I don’t dismiss sport kartiya, there’s quite a few sports I’ll watch if there’s nothing else on. Sport is good for the economy, it’s very important in combating the growing (so to speak) obesity problem, and so on. But for me personally at least, art can really mean something. It can change the way people think, it can affect culture and society outside it, whereas sport seems to be entirely enclosed, that is, what happens in a sport never has an effect on the outside world (except maybe for advertisers etc, but it’s best not to think about that).

It just seems like everywhere you look, the importance of creativity is being either played down or just plain ignored. We have reality shows instead of…you know, shows with actors and scripts and stuff. People are reading less and less, and if they do, it’s mindless stuff like Who Weekly or…the Herald Sun. The biggest selling music is usually the least creative. People would rather see the latest high budget brainless explody movie than the critically acclaimed artistic lower budget movie. So much of the most cutting edge ideas and creations go unnoticed or recognised by the majority of the public.

I believe a lack of funding has a lot to do with this. There is simply too much for artists to compete with, especially when a lot of them can barely pay the rent. If this were to change, who knows, maybe Australia will one day have an actual culture to call it’s own.

Ok, I’m poking fun a bit here. It’s just frustrating when you consider all of the unrealised potential, all the songs that could have been written but haven’t, for example. We’re missing so much there is to offer out there because we’re distracted by men in short shorts chasing a ball.
Posted by spendocrat, Thursday, 29 September 2005 11:42:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
spendocrat , we actually have a culture here - its the Aboriginal one, that's been here for a long time . most new Australians [us] don't know much about the art and culture that sustained the first Australians for thousands of years . if you get a chance you might like to study strewlow's Aranda "Songs of central Australia " for some rare insight . home-grown and beats shakespeare for mine .
more money for arts - why not, it is important .
however ,one thing that sport beats the arts in is its ability , depending on the coach and club,to give rigid team discipline and organisation to young people often when they need it most . for footballers usually three times a week,six months of the year, often for 10 years plus. there are some negatives , but they are outwayed by the benefits - and who needs national service??
Posted by kartiya, Thursday, 29 September 2005 9:49:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I’m in total agreement with you kartiya, particularly in regards to the real Australian culture.

You’ve highlighted an interesting point though – the main benefits of sport are in a pastime context, as opposed to an industry context. The advantages of exercise and discipline for kids and so on aren’t relevant to me when I tune in to watch Queer as Folk and instead get the cricket. So sport as a pastime activity sport is great, but as a big commercial industry…well, it steals the spotlight too often, that’s all.

I would love sport if were to be taken back to grass roots – lose all the commercialisation, betting, stupid Beckham haircuts, rumours, players constantly changing teams, etc etc. Of course that will never happen and so sport will stay what it is: a massive hype over not that much.

Not to mention, rigid team discipline isn’t exactly for everyone. I know I would never react well in that environment.
Posted by spendocrat, Friday, 30 September 2005 9:49:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Perhaps the issue of those young Australians that participat in sport at a young age and continue to be healthy as a result of aspiring to be one of those professional sportspeople should be examined. That they are looked after by the government in relation to schooling is positive as well. I think it is an excellent initiative to encourage young Australians. The fact that elite sportspeople get more than their fair share is good on them.
Posted by jords, Tuesday, 4 October 2005 6:05:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Although I found this article interesting I think the responses to it are even more illuminating. It degenerated into a lot of discussion on the value or otherwise of funding the arts. There was no discussion of Saul's opening point about the comparison with East Germany. I think that was the interesting point.

I think the comparison with East Germany can be stretched a bit further. Like East Germany of the 70s we spend money that we don't have on things that don't matter while neglecting things that do. Why haven't we got some global brands? Why don't we have a high-tech industry worth a damn? Why don't we have any of the world's top universities?

It seems to me that we are living in a fool's paradise where we live off money other countries lend us, which we use to bid up the price of our real-estate and spend on fripperies such as elite sport that we don't need. What is going to put food on the table in tweny years time when the iron-ore runs out? A strong university sector producing graduates working in a vibrant high tech economy with strong global businesses and brands, or fast swimmers?

Unlike Saul, I do begrudge money for sport, at least when the universities are sneered at by the minister for education and financially run down. It's depressing to see the fuss made of sports persons and Ashes defeat while Australian Nobel prize winners are lucky to get a brief mention near the end of the bulletin.

I think the comparison with East Germany of the 70's is a good one. If some commonsense as to priorities is not brought to bear, we can look forward to a future similar to that of East Germany of the 80's and 90's. That is no future at all.

PAB.
Posted by PAB, Thursday, 20 October 2005 1:09:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PAB , Have you noticed those top shelf ,well run "legal drugs" companies [ alcohol and tobacco ]sponsoring our elite sport and conditioning the minds of our young ? I once saw an Aboriginal country music concert given in northern Australia sponsored by VB , great company, very ethical !
Australians would prefer to give awards to sports people or those in arts and science thanks.
Posted by kartiya, Thursday, 20 October 2005 10:38:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello there Saul. Is it really any wonder that sport is so revered in Australia? Have a look at our academics, professionals etc in regards to Indigenous Australians. Whilst our supposed educated people were continuing thier middle class prejudice against both the working class and Aboriginals, that sport of working class boofheads and morons rugby league, were accepting and encouraging thier Indigenous brothers to stand up and fight for themselves.

Untill our universities begin to accept working class culture and the values of calling a spade a spade instead of a sophisticated earth moving apparatus complete with adjoining handle, then sport will continue it's dominance and rightly so.
Posted by be critical, Thursday, 10 November 2005 10:34:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy