In today’s culture, games and sports are highly valued. They play a critical role in advancing the economy, social, and cultural facets of society. However, these advantages are followed by negative effects in the society. For example, the previous RIO Olympic Games had an impact on the Brazilian people. Person displacement was one of the most pressing concerns. Major sporting events have an effect on those who witness them. When major sporting events begin to alter and move the space, culture, and sport, people have different perspectives. The results that ranged from new infrastructure, urban renovation, athletic culture, fandom and environmental rectifications were experienced. The study determines the level of displacement of the people, culture, and buildings. Also, it is intended to analyze on the concept of whether the government cares more about the city image and the games or the human rights of its citizens. It also aims a determining whether the whole issue is government corruption.
The RIO Olympics in Brazil contributed to various development in the country and the city in particular. The economy was boosted, and sports culture was developed in the country. Tourists were also attracted to Brazil hence providing revenue. There was an improvement in the infrastructure. This included the construction of roads and provision of lighting systems in the streets. The people still use These facilities, and they improved the image of the city especially to those who were visiting the town. However, some of the projects undertaken by the government were not of quality enough to have long-term value. This was because of embezzlement of public funds and corruption in the issuing of tenders. The buildings constructed were only intended to impress the visitors and not to benefit the locals after the end of the event.
Brazil incurred costs in holding the event in 2016, which was a demerit to the country. Billions were spent on purposes of hosting this event that was too expensive for the country. The displacement of low-income families from the streets to pave the way for construction of various Olympic structures was costly. The aim of this was to improve the city image. Brazil was struggling to fight inflation in the country. According to Lenskyj and Wagg (2012), the Rio bid intended to use the public funds gotten from the three sources including city, state and federal level. The high budgets raised the argument that the funds could be utilized better if were spent on improving the Brazil’s public services. The public was against this spending considering the problems facing the health sector in Rio due to money shortages. The federal government paid most of the costs such as supplying power temporally. Despite the expected revenue, expenses were exceeding the available funds set aside for the event.
The RIO event promoted the Athletics culture. This was not only among the locals but also to the entire world. It raised the notion of the importance of sports in the society. The participants were well rewarded for their performance. The community could rent the accommodation places and provide the supplies to the visitors. The event created an avenue for an exhibition of how athletics can be used as a career and more so a chance to express one is best skills to the world.
The fandom issue also emerged in RIO Olympics as the people formed subcultures. The fans who shared a common interest in the event characterized this. The spectators were fascinated by the presence of their celebrities in the world of sports and athletics. These groups had enthusiastic appreciation in sports. In this event, fans from different countries came together as one to participate in the global event. This together with the athletes from all over the world contributed to cultural integration. The issue of division still emerged in the game. According to Longman (2017), the Trump’s immigration restriction would lead to jeopardized relationship between countries involved. This will affect the international sports events adversely. Division refers to where people were separated into groups of support. Different countries had different in interests. Each side wanted their team to win. Therefore, this acted as a base for the division. It was displayed when people cheered for different participants. Besides, the country at large faced division. The low-income families that had been displaced were against the constructions and renovations that were being carried out by the government Creating division.
Professional sports have the economic benefit to the country hosting them. However, they also experience political problems. According to Lenskyi (2014), the expansive RIO shanty suburbs have increased due to increased political scrutiny; the town is affected by poverty and widespread corruption. They are faced by political influence whereby, senior people in administrative positions control much of its undertakings. From the point of deciding where the event is to be held, politics is involved. However, the governing bodies use the public opinion in a way to aid in decision making on whether to host the event. The citizens aim at benefiting economically in the development of hosting the event. Economic growth is achieved in the short run. However, the people who benefit more are those in the leadership positions.
The media had a significant impact on the Rio Olympic Games. It played the role of making the event be known worldwide. According to Billings and Hardin (2015), the media users prefer to watch Olympics on computers, mobile or televisions because they are available. The media aimed at attracting the viewers to watching the whole event. It led to the rise of Olympics viewership by 25% in the age group between 12-17 years. Other sites such as YouTube together with other social sites such as Facebook and Twitter also promoted the event. They provided a platform for athletes to post their activities. According to Rowe (2004), the media plays a significant role in promoting sports into daily life. It also aids in promoting media sports culture. In general, the media acted as a marketing tool in promoting the RIO Olympic. It was responsible for enabling viewing of the Olympics to the entire world.
My argument in this case of RIO Olympics is that the government partially cares about the image of the city and the games over its citizens and human rights. This is evidenced in various instances whereby the government did not seem to care about the effect of their actions on the people. For example, the displacement of the residents in the streets without considering their settlement was an act that showed the lack of human concern. The aim of the government was to pave the way for the renovation and construction of infrastructure with the goal of improving the image of the city. The government could have taken the initiative of relocating the displaced people. Also, the infrastructure and buildings that were constructed were of low standards as they were only aimed to serve the Olympic event alone. They did not care about the people who will be left behind after the event.
The entire RIO Olympics event is a government corruption. This is because not all the activities undertaken in hosting the event are up to standards.This ranges from the initial preparation to the last operations of the event. For instance, the issuing of tenders and public works were faced by corruption cases such as payment bribes to secure them. This scandal later on led to people going to streets demonstration for the impeachment of the involved leaders. This bribing issue also faced the renovation of the property in the city. Most of the politicians from the country’s political parties were involved in corruption cases related to RIO Olympics event hosting. This contributed to the continued recession of the Brazilian economy. In general, the bribing and other forms of corruption mostly involving government officials’. Therefore, affected the event significantly; the people who benefit more are those in the leadership positions and not mainly the public.
The environmental aspect of Brazil also was transformed. Despite the many under standard facilities and infrastructures, the government of Rio was responsible for cleaning the water bodies. This could not only facilitate the conduction of the Olympics games at the bay but also improve the life of people in Rio. The residents while untreated directed the effluents to the Gulf. This had to be taken care of at all costs. However, the solution was not permanent as people went back to their routine practices moments after the event elapsed.
Major sporting events affects the urban space. This applies to both the athletes and non-athletes. In a case of a country hosting such a big event such as Olympics. The citizens and the athletes face various challenges about the urban spaces. This area ranges from playing fields to relatively natural landscapes. They are meant to be open for public. However, in the case of RIO Olympics, the urban space was not privately owned to charge fees for their access. Both the community and athletes were forced to pay for them to use these facilities. The intended purpose of this space ranges from recreational opportunities, environmental objectives and providing an aesthetic value to the people. These places were restricted at the time of the event, and people could not enjoy these benefits. According to Smith (2016) when large commercial events are hosted in the public space, they are usually problematic. The state aids in modification and privatization of public realm. This leads to urban space being privatized, commercialized and securitized to greater extents. These effects were visible in RIO Olympics in Brazil. The impact of this act is noise pollution, and inconvenience of the regular users.
People tend to understand differently when the major sporting events start to change and shift the space, sports or the culture. This depends on the impact the various groups of people experience from this process of change .to the public especially the low-income families tend to be against these changes. This is because the modification of the intended purpose of urban spaces will deprive them a chance to access this area. The change in culture also will bring about the need to adjustment in the people living styles. This will in turn call for more expenses. Therefore, the people will tend to be against it. On the other hand, the rich and people in the leadership position especially the politicians will be for the change. Their understanding will vary from the public. Their primary concern is the benefits they will obtain from these changes. Therefore, the knowledge of the change process depends mainly on the impact it has on people.
In conclusion, Olympics hosting depends on the various activities that surround it to determine its course. Some factors have to be put in place to achieve the targeted goals of hosting the event. However, both the positive and adverse effects will be experienced. This is because the whole process will satisfy not all the people. This applies, in particular, the lower-income people. About RIO Olympics, the leadership was not efficient, and this was the primary reason why the event did not bring the expected benefits. There were too much bribery cases leading wastage of resources. For instance, the issuing of tenders was corrupt. Therefore, the services that were provided were not of quality. On the other hand, some benefits were achieved out of the event. This contributed to the improvement of living standards. Sectors such as tourism industry were boosted and some infrastructure still serves the public. Therefore, the hosting of this major sporting event has many benefits if only right measures are put in place.
Dart, J., & Wagg, S. (2016). Sport, Protest, and Globalization: Stopping Play.
In Billings, A. C., & In Hardin, M. C. (2015). The global impact of Olympic media at London 2012.
Lenskyj, H. J. (2014). Palgrave handbook of Olympic studies 2012. Place of publication not identified: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lenskyj, H., & Wagg, S. (2012). The Palgrave handbook of Olympic studies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Longman. (2017).Trump’s immigration order could have big impact on sports.Nytimes.com: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/sports/trump-refugee-ban.html?_r=0
Rowe, D. (2004). Sport, culture and the media: The unruly trinity. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.
Smith, A. (2016). Events in the city: Using public spaces as event venues.