My latest blog post talks about David Zirin's book about resistance demonstrations through sport, “What’s My Name, Fool?”. In the book, sport’s complex relationship with war is investigated through examples of athlete activism. This is particularly true of Chapter 5, wherein Zirin analyses the death of Pat Tillman, ESPN’s Kuwait broadcasts, Danielle “D-Smooth” Green’s anti-war statements, the actions of the Iraqi football team and the general immorality of George Bush’s administration when using sport and sport media to advocate a pro-war message. Referring to “Advertising, the Uneasy Persuasion”, by Michael Schudson, a text which outlines the ways in which sports are used to convey political agendas, a clearer picture forms as to the ways and means that the aforementioned social change initiatives, by athletes, firms and the government as well, work effectively.
David Zirin discusses the war in Iraq from several perspectives, arguing that the US government tried time and time again to use sports in order to influence the public and create pro-war sentiment. Zirin mentions the treatment of the Pat Tillman tragedy, which he claims was a prime example of the aforementioned phenomena. According to Zirin, Tillman, an NFL star that gave up a multi-million dollar contract to fight in the war, was prime pro-war propaganda fodder, except that he refused to be used as such. Zirin argues that his eventual death was then exploited by the government, who trumped up his achievements and withheld facts about the circumstances of his death to play up the “Army of One” motif, and to parade him as a role model to all Americans in an effort to increase pro-war sentiment.
This concept of organisations using sport to promote the Iraq War effort was reinforced by the NFL’s over-patriotic approach in the Colts vs Patriots game. With a slew of national symbols and an overuse of the “Murica” trope through the game, the game was used as just another way for the establishment to push their pro-war ideal. Zirin argues that the epitome of all of this was the musical stylings of Hank Williams Jr., someone known for racially tinged songs. Zirin’s last example of organisations promoting the war effort was ESPN’s filming in Kuwait during the war to show support of the troops and the war itself. Zirin argues that Disney’s conservative leanings interfered in ESPN’s coverage, leading to a gimmicky and journalistically improper month of coverage from one of the largest sport media houses (Zirin, 2004). What one can learn from Zirin’s writing is that large organisations and the government have identified the impact sport has on society and consequently, they exploit it by inserting their political viewpoint in the coverage in a shoddy attempt to trick their viewers.
Zirin points out that this a two-way street, and that athletes too can hit back at authority through the platform their garner through sports. He points to Danielle D-Smooth Green, a college basketball star that lost her arm on a tour of duty who spoke up harshly against the war effort on her return, blasting the government for their poor treatment of the situation. He also mentions the Iraq National Football Team, who George W. Bush tried to use in an advertisement for the Iraq war and the ‘freedom’ he has brought to the region, stating the team’s comments, which reflected an extreme distaste for Bush and slammed the war effort was a great way to use their platform for social change. In addition, Zirin also mentions the actions of Carlos Delgado, whose staunch anti-war statements that came from well-informed and contextual place, were extremely pertinent in swaying public opinion in the side of anti-war. As we can see, athletes standing up for what they believe in can be an extremely effective persuasive technique, due to the platform their have, and in their positions as role models.
This idea is reinforced by the journal article by Michael Schudson, which talks about television broadcasts as a means of communication and persuasion. He says that due to their ubiquity in an age where the internet was yet infantile, they served as the primary means of communication to a nation. And a large chunk of that broadcasting content is sport, which makes the influence of sport on society unimaginable. This theory ties together well with Zirin’s point, that society is molded largely by the political leanings in its sport and it is thus that athlete, fan and government activism in sport is important to study and understand.
I thoroughly enjoyed Zirin’s choice of sporting moments relating to the Iraq war and found them particularly pertinent in the understanding of political influences in sport. I agreed with his viewpoint that the government’s abuse of sport and sporting content has gone on for far too long and is a cancer that needs to be rooted out, and also agreed with his theory that fans need to take a step to say, “enough is enough” to broadcasts that over-politicise sport due to hidden agendas.
コメント