Interrogating inequalities in Sports Media: Examining gender/race representation in

Throughout the year of 2013, sports illustrated came out with 102 issues of their magazines, which also means 102 cover photos for these magazines. Out of these 102 covers, only three of them had a woman on the cover. The first one was November 11, 2013 and it was a female police officer from Boston with three other males. The second cover with a female was on October 7, 2013 with swim suit model Kate Upton. In the photo she is dressed up as a braves baseball player and is sitting with two other braves players. The third and last cover with a female took place on February 12, 2013. This was also with Kate Upton and she is in bikini bottoms with no bikini top while wearing a winter coat that is open. 

In 2013 there was not one female athlete on the cover of sports illustrated. One cover was dedicated to Boston Police but the other two had the same swim suit model on the cover and the only job she had was to look attractive. Clearly there is a challenge existing on gender in sports media and unfortunately sports illustrated is doing nothing to fix this problem. Instead, they are even objectifying women to look attractive for men. 

In my personal opinion, women should play more of a serious role in athletic magazines. They should not be viewed only as objects but rather athletes just like men are. I would say the only serious picture taken of a female in 2013 was the police officer picture but she was surrounded by three other men. Sports Illustrated needs to change the way they present women on the cover of their magazines. Hopefully this changes more in 2014.

Reflecting on the Shame of College Sports: Should NCAA Div 1 Basketball and Football players get paid?

The topic on paying college athletes has been a serious debate for a significantly long time now. So should we pay college athletes or not? Well ultimately it is your decision on whether or not we should pay them.  There are strong arguments on both sides. So what if we pay them, what's the big deal? Well the NCAA mostly does not want to pay college athletes because of the concept of amateurism. According to the NCAA, amateurism is one of the main reasons why college sports are so popular with fans. Not only that, but many schools will argue that they do not have the extra money to spend $2000 on each athlete for spending money. Also, many sports such as lacrosse, do not generate nearly as much money as football and it would be hard to provide these athletes with money. If colleges were allowed to pay their athletes, colleges would get their recruits based on how much money they were going to give. There is also the argument that many of these athletes have not matured yet mentally and would just spend the money immediately and not save it. They are young athletes and the school already pays for their education, housing, food, and other supplies. We do not need to give them extra money if the school is already providing them with everything.
However, there are also many arguments supporting the idea of paying college athletes.  Colleges generate hundreds of millions of dollars from college sports such as football and basketball. Some people ask why aren't athletes receiving a piece of this profit? They are the ones putting their bodies on the line and risking their health so the school can profit. Not only that, but when people say that athletes are given enough with a free education, others will argue they need money for basic things like gas, cloths, food, and etc. Athletes do not have time to get a job like other students because the sport they participate in takes up so much time already. If an athlete is hurt, often times they are left with nothing. No education and no money but instead a huge pile of medical bills. There is so much corruption in college sports at the moment and most of these problems would go away if colleges were allowed to pay their athletes.
In my personal opinion I think college athletes should be paid but there has to be a lot of restrictions. I do not like the idea of giving an athlete more money after his or her education, housing, food on campus, and anything else on campus is completely paid for. Just like what Hilgenberg says while getting interviewed by Jerry Carino for the USA today article, "Athletes, administrators debate scholarship stipends," however not everyone will live on campus and therefore will not be eating campus food and will most likely have a car that needs gas. I support the idea of providing these athletes with money so they can provide for themselves. I do not agree with giving them "a piece of the pie" because the college itself is making so much money. These athletes are there for school and their sport. Which ever one they put first is up to them, but they are not there to get paid for playing football. Just like every other college student, they do not get paid for going to school. You go to college to receive an education and to increase your chances at being successful in the future. Some college athletes will perform so they have a chance to go to the pros.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/09/28/athletes-administrators-debate-ncaa-scholarship-stipends/2890117/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/lets-start-paying-college-athletes.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Sport, Politics and the Olympics

In 1956, the Olympics were held in Melbourne, Australia. Interestingly enough, during this time there was extreme tension between Hungarians and Russians. In fact, there was an attempt to overthrow the Soviet regime and as a result, around 200,000 Russian troops invaded Hungary and left over 5,000 dead. As a result of these unfortunate events, there was a lot of tension between the Hungarian and Russian water polo teams. During the match there were several fights and the athletes were overly aggressive with one another. Some of them put others in choke holds and others threw punches. The match was ended early when a Hungarian player, Ervin Zador, was punched in the face by a Russian player. The referees did not want a riot to start so they ended the match. The Hungarians went on to win the gold metal and this story has been known as "Blood in the Water" at the 1956 Olympics ever since. This would definitely be an example of sport as an Opiate of the Masses because even though Hungary was being invaded and thousands of Hungarians died, they still were able to defeat the Russians in the Olympics and it gave Hungary some pride. This is a perfect example where sports can be impacted by politics and I disagree with the statement "Sport is pure and devoid of political interference." Eitzen and Sage write a chapter on sports and politics and argues that there are five political uses of sport. These five include sport as a propaganda vehicle, sport and nationalism, sport as an opiate of the masses, the exploitation of sport by politicians, and sport as a vehicle of change in society.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/blood-in-the-water-at-the-1956-olympics-1616787/