Interrogating inequalities in Sports Media: Examining gender representation in Sports Illustrated

I decided to look at Sports Illustrated and how they incorporate gender into their website and stories. The first thing I noticed when I visited their website is that they are promoting their swim suit magazine. The only women to even appear on the main page are super models in bikinis that are not even athletes. This surprised me because the winter olympics are going on and women are a significant part of the olympics, but there are only women being sexualized through advertisements on this website. In all the photos with men in them, the men are in action and are making "grunt faces" because they are in action. The headlining story is the USA mens hockey team, who plays Canada today. The tabs at the top of the website are also interesting to look at. They are all predominately sports that men play. It is not until you click the tab saying "more" that there are women sports like women's basketball and figure skating. 

Researchers at the University of Louisville found that of 716 Sports Illustrated magazines that came out between 2000 and 2011, 35 of them had women on them. This is only 4.9 percent (Jezebel.com). Sports Illustrated writes:

"Of the 35 covers including a female, only 18 (or 2.5 percent of all covers) featured a female as the primary or sole image. Three covers included females, but only as insets (small boxed image), or as part of a collage background of both male and female athletes" (Jezebel.com).

This is outrageous because women are not even featured as the main story and if so they are only used as models, not real athletes like the men. This has been happening for many many years and it is what our society likes and consumes, unfortunately. 

Citations: http://jezebel.com/sports-illustrated-loves-models-female-athletes-not-s-500138038

Reflecting on the Shame of College Sports: Should NCAA Div 1 Basketball and Football players get paid?

Whether or not to pay college athletes has been a debated for years to come. There are various pros and cons for this debate. Universities make an abundance of revenue with collegiate sports. They are constantly exploited in the media and most games are televised. They should be paid because they are the reason that these institutions are making the money and there is a lot of merchandise that universities use representing certain athletes, that the athletes do not get any compensation for. Athletes also do not have enough time to have a social life and their scholarships don't even have enough to cover all the expenses that college entails. It would also help families, incase some come from low income families and areas. 

There are also cons that have been brought up for paying college athletes.This has to do with traditionalist standpoints.  "Most traditionalists would also argue that college sports exist not so the athletes could gaine profit, but to foster the true meaning of sportsmanship between colleges" (http://www.youniversitytv.com/news-sports/5704-the-pros-and-cons-of-paying-college-athletes). It would also be unfair to have some colleges, that have more money, be able to pay students more. This would change recruiting and the drive to play. Athletes would be playing or choosing colleges based on how much money they would make. It would commercialize the sport and would not be about the love of the game. 

I have considered this topic and I do not think that players should be paid. It changes the game and is too much like professional sports, which is way too commercialized. The thing I love about college sports is that they are not getting paid and they are playing without any monetary incentives. 

High School Sport

The stigma around high school sport was that it was such a more intensive program and that only the best would play. Coaches would not put you in because "everyone gets a chance." This was the time when college recruiters would start looking at you the moment you stepped foot into high school athletics. It was the chance to get possibly a scholarship and even more. In middle school, practices would maybe be once or twice a week and not everything was mandatory. Personally, when I entered high school I was doing two-a-days, weight training, conditioning, and on top of that actual practice. Due to this stigma, people usually dropped out of the sports they were playing because they did not want to time commitment The objective of high school sports was to get noticed by colleges and to receive a higher education. They are usually never met, athletes probably around their junior year realize if they are going to college for athletics or not. Interscholastic sports are highly regarded by high schools. I can remember that the athletes were treated like kings and queens in school. We got to choose our parking spots and teachers were easier on us. The problems of interscholastic sport are that it is a lot of pressure for 15-18 year olds. The training is intense, while going to school for something that might not even turn out into a career. They are treated as the superiority, when they should be treated like everyone else. It also created rivalries among many neighbors and friends. I remember that I swam on a club team for 10 years and during that time I swam with ALL swimmers who went to my rival high school. It was always awkward swimming against them in high school meets, when we have always been apart of the same team for years. It also divides towns, especially at Friday night football games. I am not sure if there is a solution to rivalries, but it could be in the best interest of high schools to maybe not let athletes slip on by so they will not get in trouble with their coaches. 

Once the cheering stops: The life of a retired pro-athlete

With the money, the fame, and the luxury lifestyles, the life of a professional athlete  seems desirable and glamorous. When an athlete is drafted into the NFL, MLB, ect they are not thinking about what life will be like after they finish their athletic career. They are thinking about how their life will be during the years that they play. Unfortunately, the life of a retired athlete is not a glamorous one. These athletes are rushed through college and into the professional world. They retire around the age of 35 (if they are lucky) and then are kicked back into the real world, with all the real world problems. For the past decade they have been handed everything and have not had to work in the corporate world. They were constantly in the lime-light and always felt needed. After this, they are in their mid 30's and have never had a corporate job. They end up feeling lonely and useless. While they were playing a sport, their friends were climbing their way up in their occupations. This causes extreme psychological problems and in some instances, many retired athletes have committed suicide. Athletes feel so needed by their fans and then are not needed at all when they enter the real world. US sports culture idolize so many professional athletes, but tend to find a new face to idolize once that person has finished their prime. It is hard for a person to peak in their professional career when they are in their early 20's, when they have the rest of their lives to live. 

I never thought about the life of a retired athlete. I always thought their lives would be just as glamourous as when they were playing a sport. I think they live in a somewhat "fantasy" world where they are always needed and are liked for their talents. When their talents run out, what do people think of them as? It's sad that they have probably never worked a real job in their lives because they dedicated their lives to a sport.

Sports, Politics, and the Olympics

Back in 1980, the US Boycotted the summer Olympics that were held in Moscow due to political conflicts. As a rebuttal, in 1984, the Soviet Union decided to boycott the 1984 Olympics that were held in Los Angeles. The Soviets decided to do this for the "safety" of their athletes because they believed there would be protests against their athletes. President Ronald states that the boycott was "a blatant political decision for which there was no real justification." In the later days, 13 other communist countries pulled out from the Olympics, saying that they were not participating. This was also because the US boycotted the Moscow Olympics because of Russia's intervention in Afghanistan in 1979. Due to this, the US swept the Olympics and won 83 gold medals. Also, China participated in these games for the first time since 1932. 

While I know that politics are hard to ignore, I do not think they should get in the way of other people's dreams. I have heard stories of athletes who made the olympics in these few years and were never able to go. This just destroyed their dreams that they had worked all their lives for. I do think that it is important to stand by your country in these times of needs and that it is hard to support countries that are not our allies. I do not think that "sport is pure and devoid of political interference." It is just proof that politics control everything in sports, especially the Olympics. There is always some conflict going around at the times of these games.

The political uses of sports that I identified would be sport used as a propaganda vehicle. This act was nothing more than just a rash statement that made America look poorly and put attention on the Soviets and other communist countries. It was so get media attention. 

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/soviets-announce-boycott-of-1984-olympics

London Calling: The Globalization of the NFL

In recent news, the NFL has decided to open up a possibility for the NFL to expand to Europe. The reason behind this is due to the Jacksonville Jag's owner, Shahid Khan, just bought a soccer team in Europe. Unfortunately the Jags cannot seem to fill out their stadiums anymore and thought it would be better for their enterprise to expand to London. Maybe there would be more money in London, and their stands would be filled. I think they have chosen London because it is the most similar city to any city in the United States. They speak the same language as the United States and economically are similar. Also, it is a tad safer than other options. It is also an international hub, and would attract fans from all over Europe. There are various factors that are facilitating the expansion of the NFL outside of the USA. The NFL fantasizes about being as close as they can to the European Soccer Leagues. The largest reason would have to be revenue. Any chance the NFL has at making more money, they will jump at it. With this expansion, comes many barriers. There are travel expenses that could be astronomical and the time commitment it takes to get from the US to London. This also creates jet lag and fans that live in the US would not be able to afford going to Europe to watch their team play. The time difference would also make watching the games on TV very difficult. I personally think this is a terrible idea and takes away the US traditions from the game. By making it an international game, modernizes it way too much. It is all to make more money by attracting a different fan base. This could change the sport way too much and change the way we watch the game. In my opinion, football shouldn't be about the money made, and should be about the entertainment and experience.