Dr. Anthony Cavaiani
Associate Professor of Communication in the College of Art, Design, & Media at William Woods University(MO). He teaches courses in communication and sport, persuasion, and argumentation, among others. His research examines the intersection of rhetoric, sport, and space/place.
Email: acavaiani10@gmail.com
Dr. Megan Klukowski
English Faculty at Columbia Public Schools(MO). She teaches classes in English Composition and World Studies. Her research studies the relationships between gender, emotional intelligence, and burnout in educational leadership.
Email: megan.a.klukowski@gmail.com
Athlete activism was different at the Paris Games than in Tokyo. The differences between social and political activism have been researched, but uncovering the rhetorical strategies of athletes and demonstrators continue to provide us with insight about how audiences attend to and react to nuanced forms of expression.
Strikingly different from the Tokyo Summer Olympics in 2021, the Paris Olympics did not include as much social justice activism (SJA). Instead, athletes and fans engaged in what we found to be conflict activism (CA), which is activism focusing on conflicts between nations or within a country. Fans and protesters took part in a marches that honored fallen Ukrainian athletes who fought in the Russia-Ukraine war, demonstrated during a race to show solidarity with Palestine, and were disqualified from competition after showcasing a “Free Afghan Women” cape during Afghani breakdancer and refugee athlete Manizha Talash events. Protests during the Paris Olympics, while equally symbolic, were vastly different than what was communicated during the Tokyo Olympics.
Throughout Olympic history, athletes have made symbolic gestures to communicate a range of political statements. The Tokyo Games allowed for leeway with regards to athlete activism, and Rule 50 was relaxed compared to the Paris Games. In Tokyo, Olympic competition occurred amidst the backdrop of the pandemic and Black Lives Matter protests. There were no fans. Strict COVID testing and surveillance of athletes were standard. The paradoxes between the Tokyo and Paris Olympics can be witnessed when U.S. track and field athlete Noah Lyles placing third in the men’s 200m a few days after testing positive for COVID. In short, the athlete experience was significantly different in Paris, and to a large extent, so was the viewing experience for audiences around the world.
In 2024, conflicts between Israel and Hamas, the Russian war against Ukraine, and global elections shifted what Olympic athletes protests from SJA to CA. Conflict Activism (CA) emphasizes and articulates a sense of unity through displaying how protesters align themselves with a particular side of regional conflicts. While demonstrators gathering at a cycling event or marching prior to the Olympics may look similar to the Tokyo Games, the type of conflict protesters are advocating for is different. Social justice activism (SJA) communicates demands about equality for historically marginalized and under-represented groups (women; LGBTQI+; people of color; ability/disability; etc.). Frequently, athletes who engage in this activism are often members of these groups. Conversely, CA communicates demands for citizens of countries brought about by war or oppression from their government, and are typically performed by people who are not always citizens of those countries or members of a particular group.
One form of activism is not morally superior or inferior to another. At the Paris Games, CA framed unity differently than SJA. Unity became accessible to people, and upheld Olympic virtues that promote rallying behind the athletes competing for your country. It is here that CA becomes distinct from political activism. The invitation to watch or become involved may be perceived as less threatening than social justice protests due to its emphasis on war, something that many Americans have never experienced first-hand. CA may not receive as much audience opposition and resistance compared to SJA, especially when placed within the broader context of sport and occurring at the Olympics.
To measure activism solely from the viewers perspective also misses the mark entirely—the act of protest is deeply personal, and the struggle experienced by people is what drives the passionate motivation fueling the message. But audience acceptance of a protest message is important. Peeling back the layers of both SJA and CA causes us to understand, and acknowledge the perspectives of the people involved and why mobilizing to bring about change is so vital.
In the U.S., the tension between sports and politics is still polarizing for many people. CA may be less inflammatory than social justice demands. SJA requires audiences to acknowledge their own biases and beliefs, whereas CA may communicate more universally-held beliefs about death and sacrifice that come with war. In the U.S., groups who engage in backlash or dissent over athletes engaging in SJA be more open to athlete and fan demonstrations about conflict. Perhaps a main reason for this, arguably, widespread acceptance is that the CA in Paris may not directly impact as many Americans as SJA.Strategies used by athletes to amplify their message take on greater importance as activism continues, attracts diverse audiences, and becomes appealing to athletes. As Los Angeles prepares for the 2028 Summer Games, the resources available to athletes and people protesting will only increase. The need to balance the form and content of activist expression may need to be balanced against wider audience acceptance of the message.
