Borrowed from Alpe, another thread. I hope you don't mind me using it...
Not criticising your contributions or your motives for making donations, but an honest question with your charities in the back of our mind.
Does anyone understand why or how it has become possible that Lance Armstrong's foundation, the fight against cancer, and cycling in general, the TdF in particular, have become so intertwined?
(I put this in the Clinic, since it is a Lance sensitive issue. And, just to make sure, I couldn't care less who does or does not donate to the Livestrong Foundation, I am trying to dig a little deeper in the connection between "Yellow" and "Livestrong" and how that is being promoted through "Official Cycling Races")
If I remember well, the IOC have rules that aim at preventing 'social/political expressions' (Rule 51.3 provides that “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or areas).
Mostly athletes respect those rules, although with some notable and visible (Tommie Smith 1968) exceptions. More recently, I think UEFA (soccer) did not want athletes to show support for 'social/political' issues on the pitch (pulling up jerseys, showing under shirts with support for x, y, z). After Iranian elections, soccer players wore a green wrist bands around their arms to show support for the opposition. Others, I believe, have included protests with regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Then there is FC Barcelona with its longstanding history to refuse a logo/sponsor on its jersey - which of course has made the ad space all the more valuable - while it has 'donated' the empty spot to UNICEF so as to raise awareness for that cause. Granted, in this case it's not a high profile athlete, but a club as an entity supporting a cause.
What I am trying to get at, do people find the conflation of 'celebrity political/social expressions' acceptable in sports? Or more/less so for some causes, some sports, some events? Or is it something unavoidable - like sponsorships and logos on shirts - that we just have to get used to?
To illustrate further, what if Michael Phelps, after collecting each and every gold medal, starts backing his hypothetical foundation against obesity. Usain Bolt, who turns out to show support for Palestian autonomy on the podium. Cadel Evans, who repeatedly calls for better protection of Koalas, after every stage? Di Luca who uses pink wrist band, as well as the Giro to raise money for victims of the earth quake?
*try not to guess my motives, there are none other than that I am interested in seeing what people's opinions are on the theme of social/political expressions in sports, and in this case cycling*
Alpe d'Huez said:It's usually a cause I can give to with zero hesitation, regardless if I've been personally affected by it or not. This is why when I give it's usually to a real, true blue American cycling hero, Freddie Hoffman's cause for Leukemia and Lymphoma. I don't have to wonder for a second about his aspirations, and have no questions on his intentions for even one second. Or I give to the Davis Phinney Foundation, as Davis was my favorite cyclist, and still deeply affected by his illness. I haven't seen one shred that Davis is trying to profit, or has at all, from this foundation.
Not criticising your contributions or your motives for making donations, but an honest question with your charities in the back of our mind.
Does anyone understand why or how it has become possible that Lance Armstrong's foundation, the fight against cancer, and cycling in general, the TdF in particular, have become so intertwined?
(I put this in the Clinic, since it is a Lance sensitive issue. And, just to make sure, I couldn't care less who does or does not donate to the Livestrong Foundation, I am trying to dig a little deeper in the connection between "Yellow" and "Livestrong" and how that is being promoted through "Official Cycling Races")
If I remember well, the IOC have rules that aim at preventing 'social/political expressions' (Rule 51.3 provides that “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or areas).
Mostly athletes respect those rules, although with some notable and visible (Tommie Smith 1968) exceptions. More recently, I think UEFA (soccer) did not want athletes to show support for 'social/political' issues on the pitch (pulling up jerseys, showing under shirts with support for x, y, z). After Iranian elections, soccer players wore a green wrist bands around their arms to show support for the opposition. Others, I believe, have included protests with regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Then there is FC Barcelona with its longstanding history to refuse a logo/sponsor on its jersey - which of course has made the ad space all the more valuable - while it has 'donated' the empty spot to UNICEF so as to raise awareness for that cause. Granted, in this case it's not a high profile athlete, but a club as an entity supporting a cause.
What I am trying to get at, do people find the conflation of 'celebrity political/social expressions' acceptable in sports? Or more/less so for some causes, some sports, some events? Or is it something unavoidable - like sponsorships and logos on shirts - that we just have to get used to?
To illustrate further, what if Michael Phelps, after collecting each and every gold medal, starts backing his hypothetical foundation against obesity. Usain Bolt, who turns out to show support for Palestian autonomy on the podium. Cadel Evans, who repeatedly calls for better protection of Koalas, after every stage? Di Luca who uses pink wrist band, as well as the Giro to raise money for victims of the earth quake?
*try not to guess my motives, there are none other than that I am interested in seeing what people's opinions are on the theme of social/political expressions in sports, and in this case cycling*