Monday, 11 August 2008
It is interesting to see Olympic civerage from a different perspective. There was an intersting article in one of the newspapers asking if the coverage was too biased towards the US but from what I have seen it is no better or worse than the UK. There has also been some controversy as NBC paid over $500 million to move events from traditional timing to suit US prime time, hwever, in the West they have employed a time delay thus Michael Phelps winning his first gold medal was on all the news channels (and there are a lot of those) as well as the Internet three hours before it was shown "live" on the West coast. The coverage also seems to be a little more personality based than the UK - you must watch this because Phelps, Torres, Bryant etc is in. It also lacks some of the analysis as that time is used for adverts. My main issue is that if their is a heat with no US swimmer then apart from cursory commentary, the commentators mainly talked about what was happening next rather than what was happening currently. The mix of channels and sports is interesting. Firstly some sports especially team sports get more coverage in the US than individual sports (volleyball (beach and indoor) especially). Also some channels with a more masculine demographic have been given more masculine sports (boxing) presumably due to linking sponsorship to demographic while more feminine channels have got dressage!!