And the gold medal for obnoxious virtue-signaling goes to…
The International Olympic Committee’s rule on protests at the Olympics Games has been confined to one sentence in the Olympic Charter, and since that didn’t define what a “protests” were (the Committee appeared to be against them) that sentence had no practical effect. It reads, “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”
.Recognizing, however, that the athletes of one of the teams likely to win a lot of medals also had a growing proclivity for protests against it own government and President—guess which country that would be?—the IOC published a detailed list of prohibited actions that would not be welcomed at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Among them…
Kneeling during national anthems.
No fist-raising.
No use political signs or armbands.
None of the above in stadiums, pools or at a finish line, not on podiums during medal ceremonies, norduring opening orclosing ceremonies.
No such protests in the Olympic Village, either.
This list was described as a “non-exhaustive list,” meaning that violations of the spirit of the prohibitions could also be judges a violation. The documents said that merely “expressing views” was not necessarily a protest.
Boy, I guess the Committee is counting on not many athletes being lawyers. Or Bill Clinton.
As for punishment, the IOC would only say, “Each incident will be evaluated by their respective National Olympic Committee, International Federation and the IOC, and disciplinary action will be taken on a case-by-case basis as necessary.”
U.S. Olympian Gwen Berry complained, “If you do something, you’ll get in trouble, but we won’t tell you what it is…. It’s a form of control.” Well, yet, Gwen, that’s what rules and laws are. Forms of control. Berry, a hammer thrower, was one of the offending protesters during the 2019 Pan Am Games, raised a closed fist during her medal ceremony.
Shut up and throw the hammer, Gwen.
The USOC placed her and gold medalist fencer Race Imboden, who did a Kaepernick impression, on 12-month probations, which really isn’t punishment.
The rules clarify that “press conferences and interviews,” and “digital or traditional media,” are still open to free expression, so athletes will still bea able to amke fools of themselves. IOC president Thomas Bach wrote this month in open letter,
“The Olympic Games are always a global platform for the athletes and their sporting performances. They are not, and must never be, a platform to advance political or any other potentially divisive ends. We stand firmly against the growing politicization of sport because only in this way can we accomplish our mission to unite the world in peaceful competition. As history has shown, such politicization of sport leads to no result and in the end just deepens existing divisions.”
Global Athlete, an international “progressive athlete start-up movement,”—ugh—countered, “Let’s be clear, the Olympic Movement has already politicized sport,.To mention a few instances: in PyeongChang the IOC promoted a unified South and North Korean team; the IOC has an observer seat around the United Nations Assembly; the IOC President regularly meets with Heads of States; the Olympic Movement notion of sport autonomy is overshowed by Heads of States also fulfilling roles as heads of National Olympic Committees and heads of IOC Commissions hold Ministerial positions. This ship has sailed; the IOC has already politicized sport.”
This is a Rationalization #1 “Everybody does it” excuse along with #2. Ethics Estoppel, or “They’re Just as Bad.” Of course coordinating an international competition involving so many nations requires the involvement of political bodies. That’s not the same as politicizing the Games themselves. The organization also tweeted, “Freedom of expression is a right!” Not THAT again. Yes, it’s a right, but not everywhere and all the time. As with employees, those participating in events held by an organization can and should be subject to reasonable restrictions. “Don’t grandstand and hijack the event to make your own shallow political point” is not unreasonable.
The IOC and its American counterpart can end this problem by simply decreeing that any protest will result in that athlete being stripped of his or her individual medal, and banned from future competition permanently.
I’d like to see a similar rule put in place for the presenters and winners of show business awards, too.
Problem solved.
_________________________________
Source: Yahoo!
This link will work on Facebook: https://twitter.com/CaptCompliance/status/1215579972338888706
Ethics Alarms 
U.S. Olympian Gwen Berry complained, “If you do something, you’ll get in trouble, but we won’t tell you what it is…. It’s a form of control.”
Interesting…Gwen complains about control right after expressing her need for clarity from the IOC about their control.
People, whether they are 3 years old or 73 years old, need boundaries. Gwen, political “wokite” that she
seems to be, still makes a valid point. She is lamenting a problem that many (including myself) have been guilty of as parents, police, and even Presidents: setting a boundary and then either a) not enforcing the boundary or b) being nebulous about the consequences for crossing it…sometimes both. People want to know – I think they need to know – what will happen when they break the rules. A clearly defined punishment for breaking a rule is the deterrent, not the rule itself.
Your suggestion of “loss of medal and permanent ban” will seem very harsh to some. But if the IOC is really serious about stopping political protests, the first incident that is actually punished would end protests going forward. It might cause protests of another sort (against the IOC), but it’s their venue…they’re the parents and they make the rules. If an athlete wants all the prestige, the money, the fame, and the Wheaties box that goes with gold, he/she must operate under the IOC’s rules…in addition to being better than everyone else.
I’m just concerned that the IOC’s “disciplinary action [that] will be taken on a case-by-case basis…” is code for “we won’t really do anything”. As you suggest, the 12-month probation is no punishment at all, since the Games are separated by four years. And since the punishment is unspecified, what penalty does probation actually spare an athlete?
Sometimes you deliberately leave punishment or standards nebulous, because people fear the unknown rather than the known at times. If you give everyone three chances, everyone will screw up twice. That is a bad idea here, it will allow sanctioned athletes to argue vagueness. Unfortunately wokeness seems to trump achievement today, and I am surprised Krappernick’s face hasn’t made it onto a Wheaties box.
“Event hijacking” – YES, this is the term we need to use. It describes the deliberate and malicious misuse of everything from athletic events, graduation ceremonies, church picnics, all sorts of things. It shouldn’t be tolerated at a wedding rehearsal dinner where a bridesmaid uses the event to announce her own engagement, or at a grandmother’s 80th birthday party when a young relative decides to announce that they’re gay, or at Thanksgiving dinner which seems to be considered the perfect time and place for spouting political talking points by the left.
When did event hijacking become accepted? Or considered a good tactic? What the hell is wrong with these people? Hollywood award ceremonies are notorious for this, it’s expected that several winners will make an idiotic political speech, to take advantage of the audience who assuredly didn’t tune in to hear one. Is society mimicking celebrity narcissism? Although event hijacking on a large scale is most often political, I fully expect to be recruited for Amway at the next funeral I attend. Their seems to be no limit to the desire to take advantage of a captive crowd to promote oneself, or one’s causes.
No rasing of a fist at the finish line? Isn’t that quite common reaction of people who finish well, just a statement of exuberance? That one is banning a natural human reaction.
I don’t think that’s covered or banned. It’s obviously not political or a protest.