The Government Strikes Back

Before the Olympics can take place, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) must choose a country that will host the games. It is an expensive endeavor to host these games, but the benefits severely outweigh the costs. The money brought it from all the tourists and fans usually pays for any stadiums or upgrades done and still produces profit. It also gives a country the chance to showcase itself and its culture. So what does this mean for the Olympics?

Competition for hosting the Olympics is almost as fierce as the games themselves. And for many years, there have been whispers (and even screams) that the bidding process is corrupt. The IOC members each get a vote for which host nominee they prefer. Committee members, like anyone else, can be bribed. And who bribes these people? Ding Ding Ding!! You got it! Governments!

Leave it to the governments to put another shadow on these noble-intentioned games. This journal article outlines the bidding process and ways that governments screw with the process. It also details how these scandals have led the IOC to makes reforms in itself. Even now, these reforms are under question. Do they really lower the effects of corruption on the bidding process? Should the IOC be completely replaced by a more isolated committee.

This is just sad, people! Why can't we just all play together nicely? The athletes at the games play fair (mostly). Why can't governments play fair too? Well, I'll tell you why. Government's are greedy. They want what is best for their country and it does not matter what anyone else needs or wants. It does not matter if another country is best suited to host the games. This trait is not always a bad thing. It helps a country further itself in the world. But when it comes to friendly, athletic competition, it is a little over-kill. A country should work to be better so it deserves to host the games, just as an athlete practices and works out so he or she can succeed in the games. Its an internal change, not external.