I was watching George Negus on
SBS - "Dateline," Wednesday, 30th July 2008
8.30pm.

It seems that China will be strictly curtailing
the media reporting on the Olympics.

According to the report that Negus was given, there
are to be five "forbidden topics," that journalists
will not be allowed to cover.

Negus wasn't able to list the topics - but I
imagine they could be topics like - Tibet,
Human rights violations, Tiananmen Square, and so on.

My question is, should politics be kept out of
the Olympics? Should reporters comply with
China's wishes and simply report on the
sporting events, or should they raise issues like
those I've listed?

Your thoughts please?

Foxy “My question is, should politics be kept out of the Olympics?”

Ideally many things should be free of the dead hand of political accord, scrutiny and mandate.

Unfortunately the ideal does not exist

Reality, coming up short on the “ideal”, is like it or not, since the 1936 games the process has been at least, in part, politically defined and the Melbourne Olympic Games have the notoriety of being the first to be boycotted (re issues regarding Suez and Hungary in that same year)

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/anwer_sher/2008/07/expect_pockets_of_olympic_diss.html

might help with background to your question Foxy.

Regarding censorship of reporting. One famous tactic which has been used several times is for newspapers to print blank spaces where journalistic / editorial content has been censored.

It sends a stark message and one worth considering, especially since the reach of the Chinese communist party is not universal.

The Chinese... having come to power based on at least partly distorted propoganda which deliberately skewed events to persuade the masses that they were in fact 'victims of imperialist bougoise capitalists'...they know full well how the media can be manipulated for political effect :)

is there any more needing to be said?

Foxy, I would think it almost impossible to keep politics out of the Olympics. If this week's Dateline is any example, there is already much politics going on pre-Olympics and will probably continue long after now that China has opened its doors to the rest of the world both Olympic-wise and economically.

Once the games begin, the rest of the world will be temporarily focussed on medals, and human rights issues may fall into the background. China's attitude towards media only serves to reinforce what is already universally accepted about their record of human rights abuses.

Unfortunately things are not always as they 'should' be but just are what they are.

Ever since the Games were awarded to Beijing there has been this Candide-like trust in some quarters that, somehow, holding the event might change the way China is governed.

Given that China is a "communist" country (i.e. a dictatorship) how this view was ever given credence is one of life's baffling mysteries, equivalent to believing that John Edwards communicates with dead people. We know that people are sucked in, but can't for the life of us fathom why.

The allocation of the Games to Beijing was a purely commercial decision, as all such decisions have been since the Coca Cola games in Atlanta.

There will be a few idealists who will sob into their soy latte mugachinos, but life will go on much as before. No country has had the moral courage (or smug self-righteousness, really) to boycott the event, so everyone concerned will simply go ahead and make money, as they always do.

No amount of hand-wringing is going to move this particular mountain, I'm afraid.

To All of you - Thanks for your
insights.

I guess what I'm hoping for is that our
Australian foreign correspondents shall
maintain their tradition of independence
and courage, and will continue to give us
honest insights from China, despite
any imposed restrictions during the games.

But, perhaps the insights will come after
the games?

It will interesting to see nevertheless, just how much
freedom our journalists will be allowed
in their reporting.

No Politics? The Olympic Games ARE simply politics for the masses. A place where the rich nations with a decided unfair advantage assert their notional superiority over the rest. An all-swamping entertainment spectacular of the powerful nations V the rest,. Regardless of what it takes. There in lies my criticism .

Where their science and sophisticated training gives them the edge. Even the TV ran a show lauding the sports scientists as the unsung medal winners. There’s an on going cheating drugs war sanctioned in the past some countries. Where’s the honest competition? Much like the local milk bar competing with the supermarkets.

In the west the Olympic Games are an excuse for a capitalistic bonanza for the sponsors. Unfortunately many of the deluded people in the host countries often have to pick up the cost. Is it a genuine benefit to the country really? Does it really bring countries together? Did it free Hungary, will it free Falong Gong, Tibet and all the other cultural groups? Will its change China? It didn’t change Germany or Russia.

From the Chinese regime’s perspective it is more about internal national pride, an excuse to justify the CCP’s one people policy and by inference firm up their hold on power.

One wonders at the surprise of the West at China’s reneging of free journalism.
Did anyone really expect China to open the flood gates? Not bloody likely

Athletes are when all said and done simply entertainers who are pawns in a larger political ego , power assertion game. A fee good con job.

The athlete’s individual stories are on one level admirable, if over blown. But when you consider not all outstanding sporting efforts are acknowledged. Only those photogenic individuals in high profile sports are lavished with media attention, followed by sponsorship dollars and taxpayer’s money. Clearly this largess is inequitably distributed more on marketability than merit.
Circuses were important to distract the Romans too

I didn't expect China to open the flood gates,
but I did expect her to comply with the
agreements of the International Olympic Committee.
It was under that understanding that Beijing was
granted the Games in the first place.

I also felt that if the spotlight was placed on the
country, they would have to face issues like
human rights, death penalty, Tibet, and so on.
And China should have realized that this was inevitable.

If enough pressure was placed on China, I felt that
some progress in these areas could possibly be
achieved.

Now, listening to the news each evening, I'm beginning
to realize that its all a sham.
They're not making any concessions, they're not even
complying with the original agreements that awarded
the games to them.

However, if we allow this to continue, and do nothing
about it - then the shame is on us.
And what is the future of the Games if countries like
China are allowed to set this precedent.

Perhaps what we should now do is boycott their products,
to show our general disappointment.

During the Moscow Olympics, some countries abstained
from attending to show their disapproval of that
regime, and the message did get across.

A message now needs to be sent to China.
And if any one is still in doubt - check out
the Amnesty International's website on China.

The following website may also be of interest:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7529453.stm

The whole point of allowing China to host the olympics was to encourage it to improve human rights.

Since this doesn't happen, there is no longer a point in holding the olympics: both journalists and athletes should be heading home.