Globalization and sport
Introduction
The purpose of this review is to systematically deconstruct the text and highlight the key underpinnings of the authors’ argument to assess the contribution it makes into the global knowledge of globalization and sport by comparing their ideas with current trends and issues in the global sociologist community. First of all ‘Globalization and Sport’ by Miller, Lawrence, McKay & Rowe, was a very influential text, especially for the emerging sociologist in terms of the influence of Globalization, Governmentalization, Americanization, Televisualization and Commodification on sport.
The main aim of the text was to highlight the overt and covert means in which globalization has influenced sport in recent history. The authors use examples of the Olympics, World Cup soccer and ice hockey in Canada to highlight political, economic, social and cultural influences in ideas such as national identity, commodification the how capitalist structure has led to the ‘Americanization’ of sport in both a global and local context. However the scope of the text is limited by the failure to implicate surrounding issues such as cosmopolitanism in society and the resulting consumerist culture, suggesting that consumerism is a one sided relationship, where the public also influences the marketability of products with their choices.
Summary
Globalization and Sport by Miller et.al (2001) is underpinned by five interconnected socio-economic and cultural-political concepts: Globalization, Governmentalization, Americanization, Televisualization and Commodification (GGATaC). These concepts are contrasted throughout the book with what is called a ‘New International Division of Cultural Labour’ (NICL). The text progresses to make special notice of the uneven impact of GGATaC on ‘de-Canadianization’ of ice hockey (pp.52), ‘Making and Unmaking the Nation’ with English soccer (pp.42) and culminating in ‘How Nike “Just Does It”’ (Pp.56) The text also makes special note of the various battles for control of the media spectacle of sport in Britain, Australia and the US and the ‘promotion of masculinity and heteronormative biases’ of TV sport in the case of international tennis suggesting an extensive process of media sport across many national cultures which has seen ‘audiences built up by national services at public expense being turned into consumers by preying capital’
The general thesis suggests that although there appears to be some extreme instances of homogenization with the sporting media, this is not uniformly accurate; The authors tend to claim that globalization is not actually a homogenizing (making everything the same) force, they elude to the idea of global sport is hetrogenerizing (that being globalization allows for a wider range of cultural influences to construct the individual). The cornerstones to their argument are the multiple commonalties and economic tendencies which are dissected into four influential sections:
Critique
The authors suggest that merely viewing the ‘globalization’ of sport does not tackle the real issues, additional concepts such as governmentalization, Americanization, televisualization and Commodification need to be considered to realize the current controversies in global flows. Miller’s (et al, 2001) main contention is that through the process of globalization, the indigenous cultures of smaller nation-states are encouraged to become ‘Americanized’. Americanization refers to the capitalist structure which is imposed through the governmentalization, televisualization and commodification of (in a sporting context) culture; However as the authors suggest that popular US culture ‘takes on the colours of the cultures it swallows up’ (Pp.14), which suggests the process is a two way relationship.
A key point into thinking about globalization is the growing Global Anti Golf Day (GAGM) movement throughout Asia, their main objective is to ‘work against a business/state carve up of Asia into lawns for Euro-American and Japanese golf-cart-driving businessmen (Donnelly, 1996, as cited in Miller, et.al 2001, Pp.23) This suggests two ideas: anti-globalization (or localization) and national identity/nationhood; which suggests that more affluent countries impose their power over the local cultures and peoples through sport. However a major controversy surrounds national identity in sport, a country lays claim to having given him or her their ability and are the sole reason for their success, when realistically the athlete as migrated to more affluent nations in an attempt to gain sponsorship or resources to compete. (Maguire, 1994)
Miller et.al (2001) comments that it is a common sight during global events, such as the Olympics to see national flags waving behind the athletes efforts, the applause from an audience who are dressed in their countries ‘war paint’ (that being ‘official’ supporter clothing, face paints and patriotically waving the flag). All the while media commentary consistently draws on the athletes nationality as a primary factor for their performance with advertisements from corporate sponsors aim to commodify nationalism and their sport into products to be consumed. A key example of this process is of Wilson Kipketer, an 800 meter world champion. He born and raised in Kenya, became a Dutch citizen who trains in Switzerland under a Polish coach, the question is which culture and national image does he represent?
Drawing these ideas together Maguire (2011) suggests that:
It can also be observed that global sports festivals such as the Olympics, the Asian Games and the Pan- American Games have come to serve as vehicles for the expression of ideologies that are not only national in character…. but are also transnational in their consequences. (pp.987)
This highlights the contradictory relationship between globalization and national identity and it is almost as if nationalistic euphoria masks the real socio-cultural flows in the global community and the subversive colonialism which seeks to impose their own values in which to reap the cream of the athletic crop, resulting is the social reproduction of the smaller nations are underrepresented! (Allison, 2005; Giulianotti 2004).
However a key global phenomenon has been largely omitted from the text, ‘cosmopolitanism’, although Miller et.al (2001) alludes to the concept during chapter 3: National Symbolism and Sporting Bodies (Pp.31-60); this view on cosmopolitanism rests on the multinational athlete or sports person (and the residual commodification of equipment such by corporations such as Nike) rather than the cosmopolitan societies which support them. This spurs the main argument being that how could a society support a sport as an attribute of culture if the sport isn’t perceived as of cultural importance? (Roudometof, 2005)
However Beck & Sznaider (2010, p.382) suggests that ‘cosmopolitanism is, of course, a contested term; there is no uniform interpretation of it in the growing literature. The boundaries separating it from competitive terms like globalization, transnationalism (or multinationism), universalism, glocalization etc. are not distinct’. In response and for the purpose of analysis, Roudometof (2005) constrains cosmopolitanism to being;
However cosmopolitanism isn’t necessarily opposed to nationalism (and vice versa); in fact the relationship is cyclical in nature, with the influence of a mix of culture constructing the national image. This can either be positive (i.e. the role of soccer in the Americas to control civil disorder) or have negative repercussions (The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia). Therefore cosmopolitanism can be seen as post-nationalism opposed to the localism of culture.
Conclusion
Globalization and Sport was a very insightful text, especially for the emerging sociologist in terms of the influence of Globalization, Governmentalization, Americanization, Televisualization and Commodification on sport. Miller et.al (2001) makes strong links between international events and sports such as the Olympics, the Soccer world cup and the Rugby world cup to highlight the commodification of sporting experience by multi-national corporations and governments. The authors also express their concern for sport-as-culture with the influence of GGATaC, with one of the key attributes being the ‘Americanization’ of global sport which suggests that colonialism has transcended power and processed to become more subversive in nature.
However the authors do not make significant reference to the effects of the cosmopolitan society in which the globalization/glocalization takes place, which undermines their argument as it suggests that the commodification process is a one way relationship (they tell us what to buy) as opposed to a two way relationship (they tell us what to buy and we buy what we want, which influences what they tell us to buy). However overall a crucial text for an introduction into the processes at play within the globalized world and a valuable addition to any sociologists library.
Professional Statement
From this review and as an emerging sociologist in sport education I have learnt
Allison, L (Ed). (2005). The Global Politics of Sport: The role of Global Institutions in Sport, Routledge:Great Britain
Beck, U & Sznaider N (2010) Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: a research agenda, The British Journal of Sociology pp. 381- 402
Giulianotti. R, (2004): Human Rights, Globalization and Sentimental Education: The Case of Sport, Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, No.7, Vol. 3, Pp. 355-369
Maguire, J. A (1994), Sport, Identity Politics, and Globalization: Diminishing Contrasts and Increasing Varieties , Sociology of Sport Journal, Vol. 11, Pp.398-427
Maguire, J. A (2011): Globalization, sport and national identities, Sport in Society, Vol.14, No.7-8, pp. 978-993
Miller et.al (2001) Globalization and Sport: Playing the world, Sage Publications
Roudometof. V, (2005) Transnationalism, Cosmopolitanism and Glocalization, Current Sociology, pp. 53 – 113
The purpose of this review is to systematically deconstruct the text and highlight the key underpinnings of the authors’ argument to assess the contribution it makes into the global knowledge of globalization and sport by comparing their ideas with current trends and issues in the global sociologist community. First of all ‘Globalization and Sport’ by Miller, Lawrence, McKay & Rowe, was a very influential text, especially for the emerging sociologist in terms of the influence of Globalization, Governmentalization, Americanization, Televisualization and Commodification on sport.
The main aim of the text was to highlight the overt and covert means in which globalization has influenced sport in recent history. The authors use examples of the Olympics, World Cup soccer and ice hockey in Canada to highlight political, economic, social and cultural influences in ideas such as national identity, commodification the how capitalist structure has led to the ‘Americanization’ of sport in both a global and local context. However the scope of the text is limited by the failure to implicate surrounding issues such as cosmopolitanism in society and the resulting consumerist culture, suggesting that consumerism is a one sided relationship, where the public also influences the marketability of products with their choices.
Summary
Globalization and Sport by Miller et.al (2001) is underpinned by five interconnected socio-economic and cultural-political concepts: Globalization, Governmentalization, Americanization, Televisualization and Commodification (GGATaC). These concepts are contrasted throughout the book with what is called a ‘New International Division of Cultural Labour’ (NICL). The text progresses to make special notice of the uneven impact of GGATaC on ‘de-Canadianization’ of ice hockey (pp.52), ‘Making and Unmaking the Nation’ with English soccer (pp.42) and culminating in ‘How Nike “Just Does It”’ (Pp.56) The text also makes special note of the various battles for control of the media spectacle of sport in Britain, Australia and the US and the ‘promotion of masculinity and heteronormative biases’ of TV sport in the case of international tennis suggesting an extensive process of media sport across many national cultures which has seen ‘audiences built up by national services at public expense being turned into consumers by preying capital’
The general thesis suggests that although there appears to be some extreme instances of homogenization with the sporting media, this is not uniformly accurate; The authors tend to claim that globalization is not actually a homogenizing (making everything the same) force, they elude to the idea of global sport is hetrogenerizing (that being globalization allows for a wider range of cultural influences to construct the individual). The cornerstones to their argument are the multiple commonalties and economic tendencies which are dissected into four influential sections:
- theories of globalization as it affects sport
- analytical approaches to the body as trained and commodified
- television's contribution to the transformation of sport, against a backdrop of huge change in its own field
- Problematic nature of governance, which prompt questions about who rules and who benefits.
Critique
The authors suggest that merely viewing the ‘globalization’ of sport does not tackle the real issues, additional concepts such as governmentalization, Americanization, televisualization and Commodification need to be considered to realize the current controversies in global flows. Miller’s (et al, 2001) main contention is that through the process of globalization, the indigenous cultures of smaller nation-states are encouraged to become ‘Americanized’. Americanization refers to the capitalist structure which is imposed through the governmentalization, televisualization and commodification of (in a sporting context) culture; However as the authors suggest that popular US culture ‘takes on the colours of the cultures it swallows up’ (Pp.14), which suggests the process is a two way relationship.
A key point into thinking about globalization is the growing Global Anti Golf Day (GAGM) movement throughout Asia, their main objective is to ‘work against a business/state carve up of Asia into lawns for Euro-American and Japanese golf-cart-driving businessmen (Donnelly, 1996, as cited in Miller, et.al 2001, Pp.23) This suggests two ideas: anti-globalization (or localization) and national identity/nationhood; which suggests that more affluent countries impose their power over the local cultures and peoples through sport. However a major controversy surrounds national identity in sport, a country lays claim to having given him or her their ability and are the sole reason for their success, when realistically the athlete as migrated to more affluent nations in an attempt to gain sponsorship or resources to compete. (Maguire, 1994)
Miller et.al (2001) comments that it is a common sight during global events, such as the Olympics to see national flags waving behind the athletes efforts, the applause from an audience who are dressed in their countries ‘war paint’ (that being ‘official’ supporter clothing, face paints and patriotically waving the flag). All the while media commentary consistently draws on the athletes nationality as a primary factor for their performance with advertisements from corporate sponsors aim to commodify nationalism and their sport into products to be consumed. A key example of this process is of Wilson Kipketer, an 800 meter world champion. He born and raised in Kenya, became a Dutch citizen who trains in Switzerland under a Polish coach, the question is which culture and national image does he represent?
Drawing these ideas together Maguire (2011) suggests that:
It can also be observed that global sports festivals such as the Olympics, the Asian Games and the Pan- American Games have come to serve as vehicles for the expression of ideologies that are not only national in character…. but are also transnational in their consequences. (pp.987)
This highlights the contradictory relationship between globalization and national identity and it is almost as if nationalistic euphoria masks the real socio-cultural flows in the global community and the subversive colonialism which seeks to impose their own values in which to reap the cream of the athletic crop, resulting is the social reproduction of the smaller nations are underrepresented! (Allison, 2005; Giulianotti 2004).
However a key global phenomenon has been largely omitted from the text, ‘cosmopolitanism’, although Miller et.al (2001) alludes to the concept during chapter 3: National Symbolism and Sporting Bodies (Pp.31-60); this view on cosmopolitanism rests on the multinational athlete or sports person (and the residual commodification of equipment such by corporations such as Nike) rather than the cosmopolitan societies which support them. This spurs the main argument being that how could a society support a sport as an attribute of culture if the sport isn’t perceived as of cultural importance? (Roudometof, 2005)
However Beck & Sznaider (2010, p.382) suggests that ‘cosmopolitanism is, of course, a contested term; there is no uniform interpretation of it in the growing literature. The boundaries separating it from competitive terms like globalization, transnationalism (or multinationism), universalism, glocalization etc. are not distinct’. In response and for the purpose of analysis, Roudometof (2005) constrains cosmopolitanism to being;
- the notion of cosmopolitanism as an attitude or a quality manifested in people’s attitudes and orientations
- The notion of cosmopolitanism as a moral and ethical standpoint.
However cosmopolitanism isn’t necessarily opposed to nationalism (and vice versa); in fact the relationship is cyclical in nature, with the influence of a mix of culture constructing the national image. This can either be positive (i.e. the role of soccer in the Americas to control civil disorder) or have negative repercussions (The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia). Therefore cosmopolitanism can be seen as post-nationalism opposed to the localism of culture.
Conclusion
Globalization and Sport was a very insightful text, especially for the emerging sociologist in terms of the influence of Globalization, Governmentalization, Americanization, Televisualization and Commodification on sport. Miller et.al (2001) makes strong links between international events and sports such as the Olympics, the Soccer world cup and the Rugby world cup to highlight the commodification of sporting experience by multi-national corporations and governments. The authors also express their concern for sport-as-culture with the influence of GGATaC, with one of the key attributes being the ‘Americanization’ of global sport which suggests that colonialism has transcended power and processed to become more subversive in nature.
However the authors do not make significant reference to the effects of the cosmopolitan society in which the globalization/glocalization takes place, which undermines their argument as it suggests that the commodification process is a one way relationship (they tell us what to buy) as opposed to a two way relationship (they tell us what to buy and we buy what we want, which influences what they tell us to buy). However overall a crucial text for an introduction into the processes at play within the globalized world and a valuable addition to any sociologists library.
Professional Statement
From this review and as an emerging sociologist in sport education I have learnt
- Sport-as-culture/Sport-as-capital/Sport-as-politics are the key drivers behind the globalization of sport on a global level, but also how globalist ideals filter down into national and even local sporting competitions. This has informed my choice in equipment and resources as I am made aware of the real repercussions of choices made on a local level which subversively influence the development of the ‘third world’
- Sport-as-colonialism: That being that sporting culture can be used to impose social and cultural ideals between national borders. Extending this is the idea of sport being of-and-for social good, as can be seen in the central and south Americas with the use of soccer to deter antisocial or delinquent behavior. This will be applied in my educational career through the use of extra-curricular sport (or physical activity) to act as a social medium for cohesion in secondary schools.
- Sport as a commodity: That being the use of sport to sell consumable products through sponsorship and endorsements (which connecting back into other concepts of EDF-3613) illustrates the material nature of capitalism through the replacement of ‘I need’ with ‘I want’ and the skewing of the experience through the disconnection from the natural space through synthetic (or manufactured) goods. Also extending from this is a critical insight into the commodification of sport-as-experience through television or spectatorial ideals (I rather pay to watch than actually be involved)
Allison, L (Ed). (2005). The Global Politics of Sport: The role of Global Institutions in Sport, Routledge:Great Britain
Beck, U & Sznaider N (2010) Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: a research agenda, The British Journal of Sociology pp. 381- 402
Giulianotti. R, (2004): Human Rights, Globalization and Sentimental Education: The Case of Sport, Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, No.7, Vol. 3, Pp. 355-369
Maguire, J. A (1994), Sport, Identity Politics, and Globalization: Diminishing Contrasts and Increasing Varieties , Sociology of Sport Journal, Vol. 11, Pp.398-427
Maguire, J. A (2011): Globalization, sport and national identities, Sport in Society, Vol.14, No.7-8, pp. 978-993
Miller et.al (2001) Globalization and Sport: Playing the world, Sage Publications
Roudometof. V, (2005) Transnationalism, Cosmopolitanism and Glocalization, Current Sociology, pp. 53 – 113