Speaking recently with CNN’s Brian Stelter about the upcoming Winter Olympics, veteran sportscaster Bob Costas said, “any network that broadcasts big sports events is simultaneously in a position — it’s quasi-journalistic, at best — you’re reporting a news event and what surrounds it . . . but also promoting the event.”

He’s right, of course. The Olympics are a moneymaker for NBC. During the last winter games, in PyeongChang, NBC averaged 20 million nightly viewers and made more than $920 million in national ad sales. What does that mean for Olympic coverage? Because it wants people to tune in, NBC may pull its punches in reporting on the human rights context in which the games occur — a context that might well turn people off. It may likewise avoid such reporting because it wants to maintain productive relationships with both the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and with current and future host governments.

If NBC’s sportscasters take
umbrage at the “quasi-journalistic” moniker, however, there are obvious steps
they can take to prove critics wrong. Consider one in particular.

When Thomas Bach, president of the International Olympic Committee, inevitably sits down for an interview with Mike Tirico, who headlines NBC’s Olympic coverage, he should face the sort of questioning he has not faced in the years since China’s mass detention of Muslim minorities in concentration camps came to light. Rather than one question about human rights, Tirico should make it his focus. Questions should include the following:

• Given that Beijing failed to follow through on human rights and press freedom assurances it made ahead of hosting the 2008 Summer Games, why was the IOC comfortable awarding the games to Beijing again?
• According to the Olympic Charter, “Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example, social responsibility and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.” How is holding the Olympics in a country that is credibly accused of conducting a genocide and committing crimes against humanity consistent with advancing “universal fundamental ethical principles”?
• You have repeatedly insisted that “the Olympic Games are not about politics,” that the IOC “is strictly politically neutral at all times,” and that the Olympics cannot “address all the political and social challenges in our world.” But the IOC barred South Africa from participating in the Olympics for decades because of apartheid. How do you square that circle?
• The Olympic Charter includes the following among its “Fundamental Principles of Olympism”: “The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.” The IOC justified barring South Africa from the Olympics because apartheid denied equality in sport. Given the mass detention of between 1 and 3 million Muslims in camps in Xinjiang, given repression of Tibetans and other ethnic and religious groups, given the Chinese state’s punishment of dissidents’ and activists’ family members, do you believe that the practice of sport is protected as a human right in China? Do you believe there is no “discrimination of any kind” when it comes to practicing sport in China?
• As more and more details emerged about human rights abuses in Xinjiang in the years leading up to these Olympics, did you ever seek permission to lead a fact-finding mission to the region? As more information has come to light, have you used your position to call for or encourage Chinese authorities to close the camps or otherwise alter course?
• These Olympics have drawn comparisons to the 1936 Olympics, which were held in Hitler’s Germany. What do you say to that? And do you think holding those games in Berlin was a mistake?
• Will you pledge — right here and right now — that the Olympics will never again be held in a country whose government is credibly accused committing genocide or crimes against humanity?
• Your handling of the Peng Shuai affair has come under criticism. An American lawmaker has even introduced legislation to sanction you for abetting Chinese human rights abuses in this instance. Do you think your approach has had any effect in ensuring her freedom and that her rape accusation is investigated? In your conversations with her, do you believe she is speaking freely? Do you believe her decisions are her own?
• In January, a Chinese Olympic official openly threatened participants, saying that “any behavior or speech that is against the Olympic spirit, especially against the Chinese laws and regulations, are also subject to certain punishment.” Olympic Committees around the world are warning their athletes about surveillance practices in China and encouraging them to use burner phones or temporary devices while in the country. The app that all participants must download is riddled with security flaws. Why should athletes have to risk their privacy and the security of their personal data to participate in the Olympics? Why doesn’t the IOC take such things into consideration when deciding on host cities?

The post Questions the Olympic Committee should consider on Beijing’s human rights abuses appeared first on American Enterprise Institute – AEI.