Dr. Jörg-Uwe Nieland
Senior Scientist at the Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt and associate at the Institute for European Sport Development and Leisure Research at the German Sport University Cologne. His work focuses on sport mediatization, sport policy, politics in sport, and media development.
Email: joerg-uwe.nieland@gmx.net
Twitter: @JoergUweNieland
The ongoing military conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East represent some of the most pressing challenges in contemporary international politics. These wars not only pose significant obstacles for the nations directly involved but also reverberate far beyond their borders, impacting various global sectors. The crises stemming from the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have profoundly affected the sporting world, particularly regarding how to address the participation of athletes from Russia and Belarus, as well as those from Israel and Palestine. This situation has created a critical juncture for the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the National Olympic committees (NOCs) and other sport federations (such as World Athletics) as they grapple with whether Russian and Belarusian athletes (and teams) should be permitted to compete in international sport events, especially at the Olympics. Additionally, there are pressing concerns about how to facilitate competitions between Israeli and Palestinian athletes amidst ongoing tensions.
According to the Palestinian Olympic Committee, over 300 Palestinian athletes and coaches have lost their lives since the onset of conflict. In response, President Jibril ar-Radzhub called for the exclusion of Israeli athletes from competitions. Conversely, the IOC advocated for “peaceful coexistence” between the National Olympic Committees of Israel and Palestine. While Ukrainian athletes were celebrated for their participation and success by the public, the media and athletes from other nations, Israeli athletes felt threatened and often not integrated. The vision of Paris 2024 as a “symbol of unity and peace,” as articulated by IOC President Thomas Bach, appears to be challenged by these complex realities. The 2024 Olympics stand at a crossroads where geopolitical tensions intersect with the ideals of sport. The IOC’s ability to navigate these challenges will not only test its leadership but also shape the future landscape of international sports diplomacy.
If sport serves as both a catalyst and a casualty of political and social developments, there is a pressing need for research into sports associations from both sociological and policy perspectives. This necessity is particularly evident in the context of Russian sports diplomacy and the complex dynamics among key actors and institutions in the Middle East. Drawing on neo-institutionalist theoretical frameworks, we can identify enduring social institutions within the political realm of sport that are focused on the preparation, production, implementation, and oversight of decisions.
Additionally, interactions with the media play a crucial role in how sports associations manage crises. Utilizing communication science methodologies, we can analyze how these associations perceive media coverage of ongoing conflicts—specifically regarding calls for the exclusion of Russian and Belarus athletes versus the participation of athletes from Israel and Palestine.
From a communication science standpoint, it is essential to explore whether the space for critical sports journalism is being constructed by these circumstances. This inquiry could illuminate the challenges faced by journalists in addressing complex geopolitical issues while maintaining journalistic integrity and independence.
The ongoing survey shows, firstly, the wars are posing greater challenges to sports federations, particularly the IOC, than the COVID-19 pandemic did. Secondly, there has been a noticeable fragmentation among federations in the lead-up to the Games. Thirdly, we observe a decline in legitimacy and an increase in criticism regarding the decision-making processes and communication strategies within these federations. Fourthly, despite this growing criticism, there has been little introspection within the IOC or among the sports federations themselves. It is evident that achieving genuine peace in sport between Ukraine and Russia, as well as Israel and Palestine, remains elusive for the foreseeable future. The suffering is too profound, and the political positions are too entrenched.
Regarding media dynamics, the medialization and economization of sport have driven forward the instrumentalization of sport. Sports federations, clubs, and athletes have come under scrutiny by the media, fans, sports politics and sponsors. Medialization also led to a professionalization of communication among sports stakeholders, which is reflected in particular in the growth of owned media. But on the other hand, we see a decline in interest in major sporting events. This was due to the restrictions during COVID-19 and the debates surrounding the World Cup in Qatar.
Unfortunately, the Paris Olympics have further contributed to the decline of critical sports journalism. This decline can be attributed to several factors: rising costs associated with TV rights; a dramatic reduction in resources available to traditional media; changing working conditions; evolving perceptions of journalists’ roles; and increasingly restricted access for sports journalists to athletes This trend has led to the adoption of sports broadcasting principles—such as event-driven coverage, entertainment focus, ritualization, and a person-centered approach—within sports journalism itself.
This limited landscape of critical sports journalism raises concerns about its future viability. The world of sport—and particularly the often-misappropriated Olympic ideal—is entering a crisis. There is an increasing emphasis on soccer, especially within social media platforms, while fans continue to lack a meaningful voice in the discourse.
The ongoing legitimacy crisis and issues surrounding acceptance necessitate long-term adjustments within the sports sector. It is imperative that these changes be critically examined and supported by robust sports journalism and critical sports communication research.
