The Olympic Legacy
I just read this article on Guardian (via Buzz) regarding the legacy of the sporting venues created for the Olympics and whether they’re worth it.
Living in Athens for the past three years it’s become clear to me that most people — including myself until very lately — is unaware that they can, cheaply, access some of the facilities created for the 2004 Olympics, for example the Olympic swimming centre. It has been clear that most of the facilities have been under lock and key and unavailable to anyone wishing to use them. Then there’s the case of ‘The Mall’, the huge shopping mall that was created just after the games and which seems to be illegally built (a story widely publicised [in Hellenic], but largely ignored), but also a recent report [in Hellenic] by the Hellenic private TV station ‘Alpha’ claiming that the main building of the Olympic Village was given by the Hellenic government to a monastery which then sold it.
It’s, therefore, unclear to me whether the Olympic facilities are really a burden or whether Athens is such a bad example upon which this conclusion is drawn. With proper management, more public interest and — if anything — no multi-billion euro scandals, I’m pretty sure that the Olympic investments could be beneficial to many hosts. Barcelona comes to mind.
‘Widely’ published? Gimme a break. You’re talking about two pieces in how many years? And how many Greeks actually read Γαλέρα? And wasn’t the journo that broke the story pro bono recently fired from his newspaper for compiling a report that was inconvenient to a (fast-food company affiliate and) colleague of his and his editor-in-chief?
In fact most of the press The Mall has had was deliriously enthusiastic; no matter how illegal the acts of businessmen are, they always find politicians eager to help them get away with it.
Hello steppenwolf.
Widely publicised. Not published. There was a lot of noise about this at the time. Now, few people read Γαλέρα, that’s true. I referred to the it because I had kept the bookmarks and because it 1. broke the story and 2. had the most comprehensive coverage. It also isn’t — by any account — an absolutely unbiased publication, but I do recall more mainstream publications mentioning the case (the newspaper you mention is one of them — still I don’t quite see why you’d make this point).
Most of the mainstream press is, admittedly, as ignorant of its role in society and ineffective as it possibly could. Nevertheless, I fail to blame the press, or the fat cats when — from my experience — most people consciously know and choose to tolerate it.
Cosmix: hi again.
Name one ‘unbiased publication’/medium?
Ever read Gramsci? Try his theory of hegemony. The media’s role is manufacturing consent, with a precious few exceptions. The Mall case is emblematic of celebrating consumerism on their part.
Strictly speaking, there are none. Yet I’m quite certain you can probably get the point I was making without me elaborating needlessly here.
Furthermore, I’m not really sure I understand your point re: Gramsci. If I do get it right, I don’t agree with the parallel you’re drawing. It’s not uncommong for the media to (attempt to) manufacture consent; apathy — as described in my comment above and especially in our time, is unjustified, no matter what the media does. This is not the early 20th century in terms of demographics (education, quality of life, freedom of expression, and governance). Invoking Gramsci in this case as a means to explain why people choose to ignore all that’s wrong around them is — in my opinion — extremely weak. In other words: it doesn’t matter what most of the press chooses to do with regards to any particular scandal. The case was known, some media made mention of it and people knew and talked about it.
It’s irrelevant to the point I’m making whether some media tried to conceal it, whether others celebrated its existence or whether Gramsci was right when he was authoring a theory based on his observations of early 20th century Italy. Furthermore, I don’t see any connection to the point of the post anyway. It seems to me — from what I can tell by reading your comments — that you agree with the overall point that Athens is probably a bad example when it comes to evaluating whether the Olympic ‘heritage’ is a burden to an ex-host of the Games.
Actually, I was and still am against the Games.