The
Olympic Flame has gone out in Tokyo, and in our house, I believe
the final total of television coverage watched added up to slightly
less than ten seconds.
Yes.
Ten seconds.
It
would have been nothing at all, but when we turned the television
on one day the it was on one of the alternate stations NBC owns
and was using for providing Olympic segments. We left it there
while deciding what to watch. So, ten seconds.
And
I have to tell you, I have no clue why I just wasn’t interested.
I like the Olympics. Just zero interest this year, even as a casual
spectator of anything that could be on.
Some
researchers and observers with experience and statistics and numbers
want me to believe that it’s because of the high-quality of alternative
programming. There’s certainly something to that. (How great was
The Suicide Squad?) But I think a good chunk of it also
borders on hogwash, where someone is looking for an easy excuse,
believes they’ve got one, and it starts getting tossed around
without any other possibilities investigated. After all, the ratings
are supposedly tanking, and I don’t have to tell you that there
isn’t anyone working for NBC that wants to see the blame pointing
toward them or their department.
So,
hogwash I say. And, yeah.
First
off, much like mega-events such as the Super Bowl, most network
scheduling appears to clear the path of Olympic dominance. Might
be one night event, might be multiple nights. It’s definitely
reality that very few first-run episodes of any show were aired
during the roughly two weeks of the Games.
Next
up, the expanded coverage NBC provides is better than ever for
the enthusiast. Between their stable of stations and streaming
options for coverage placement, NBC had the ability to deliver
more of the competitions, live and delayed, than ever before.
When I was young, this would have been heaven. More volleyball
and track cycling? Handball, water polo, kayak, and rowing? Incredible.
So
yes, I admit that other possibilities will thin out the audience.
The fact that I did watch other stuff proves that. But I do believe
there’s more to it. You can’t react to the numbers by placing
it on this excuse, cupping your hands over your ears and humming
while you walk away. That’s like making a horrible movie, with
no part of it even reaching a so-so level of quality in the production,
and then saying the only reason no one bought a ticket is because
they were playing Words with Friends on their phones.
Are some people playing Words with Friends? Yes. Are
some people quite happy curled up in a comfy chair playing Words
with Friends and not heading out to see your movie? Yes.
But there’s definitely more to the empty seats than Words
with Friends.
I
personally think the amateur status of things is involved in some
ways. Now, these days, there is no amateur illusion about the
Olympics at all. But if you go back forty years, you’ll see that
wasn’t the case. With the conversion of basketball as an example,
I’ve found a bit of a smudge on the thing. Not because sending
professionals is wrong or something I disagree with, but… ok…
let’s go back and take a look…
The
United States used to send amateur basketball players, drawn primarily
from college ranks, to compete. And while the USA was winning
gold after gold after gold, it was a point of pride. Honestly,
it was often chest-thumping pride. The 1972 loss in the gold medal
game has accurately and deservedly been called one of the most
controversial moments in Olympic history. Yes, sending amateurs
to the Olympics was a big thing. Until it wasn’t. After losing
in 1988, where poor play and not bribed officials led to the bronze
medal, changes were made by the International Basketball Federation
(FIBA). Professionals would be allowed.
Just
one sport. But for America, amateurs were great, until they weren’t
winning. I do believe in sending the best athletes. No problems
with professionals being there. But this amateur thing is just
one area where the Olympics tend to have a don’t-look-back-here
appearance to the process.
As
another example, the moments aren’t really the same. You understand
what the moments are, yes? Things that can’t be planned or designed.
Moments where something happens and lightning strikes and virtually
anyone you speak with knows within two or three words what you
are about to say.
Don’t
believe me? Ok… consider this…
The
Olympics, as I write this, just closed its doors and put out the
lights. Can you give me three amazing moments from this Olympiad?
I’m
just asking for three.
Just
three.
Any
time.
Ok.
Let’s make it easier. Name one. Only condition being, when you
reveal your special moment, we are going to assemble a random
group of people. More than half of them need to recognize the
moment.
So,
just one.
Only
one memorable moment.
Got
it? No. You don’t. Because there wasn’t one that a majority of
any group will recognize.
Still,
some countries celebrated in very significant ways. Bermuda, Qatar
and the Philippines brought home gold for the first time in a
Summer Olympics competition. San Marino, one of the smallest countries
in the world, earned its first Olympic medals during these Games.
There were other countries earning podium positions for the first
time.
Still.
Not many special moments that soared above it all with fireworks
and fanfare.
The
world is becoming a smaller place every day. Technology eases
the exchange of information. A recognition of people as equals
is building. National pride continues, even as definitions created
by borders are smoothed. And I’d argue that many people are looking
for shared senses of accomplishment rather than chest-thumping
finger pointing.
And
perhaps that’s where a good portion of this debate gets answered.
Because people may be turning to other sources of entertainment,
lowering Olympic ratings. But that desire to find the special
remains. We just can’t decide on what the correct special may
be.
During
the Olympics, I saw articles saying that medal counts were being
produced incorrectly. On one side, writers claimed that gold was
the standard as gold was won by the winners. On the other side,
writers claimed that medals of all types mattered. And absolutely
none of the articles claiming that medals were being tallied in
almost farcical and definitively inappropriate ways managed to
mention the medals from Bermuda, San Marino and others that were
first of their kind. In short, much like sending amateurs to play
basketball, the counting of medals in a specific way only matters
to the individual keeping track. Once the results detract or oppose
those anticipated from the audience, change the narrative.
I
am proud to be an American. I do love my country and our accomplishments.
I’m
also proud of the larger whole. A love for people. And I want
us to work together, with equality and opportunity, moving along
a journey to be better tomorrow than we are today.
Do
I want to watch the Olympics? (Remember, that’s where we started?)
Yes, I do. This year, I simply never found myself in a moment
where searching for a portion of the Games that I wanted to see
was something I wanted to do. That’s it. I had work to do around
the house and in the yard. I had commitments and chores that needed
to be addressed. There were other things that distracted me during
downtime. It wasn’t all the idea of not wanting the Olympics.
It was more of priorities.
I
want to be clear and fair, though, and repeat it wasn’t all about
the alternatives. And if NBC wants to blame streaming services
and more for drops in ratings, they can. There is a degree of
that happening. But there needs to be an awareness that the investments
of viewers are no longer the same, and that other factors are
involved. Rarely does a complex issue have a simple answer. And
when you apply a simple answer to a difficult problem, well, generally
the problem continues.
I
plan on watching the games from Beijing, Paris, Milan and Los
Angeles. I expect to be entertained and thrilled and smiling.
I hope to see the fireworks and fanfare, and look forward to celebrating
the accomplishments. (Of course, Death on the Nile is
out in February of 2022. There are alternatives.)