04 September 2008

Mitcham's edited Gold

An Australian diver makes Olympic history, but the story doesn't quite make it into news. Too inconvenient perhaps? Guest essay by Tim.

3 comments:

yuen said...

why is his sexual orientation important? why should reporters make a fuss about it? in fact, if they did, wont the gays complain about the reporters being irrelevant?

(many years ago, feminists used to write articles and make TV programmes extolling female achievements "these are great paintings, and the artists were female..."; I hope no one is thinking of similar proganda about gays)

The said...

/// Almost all the international media coverage didn't fail to leave out Steiner's wrenching medal ceremony, where, openly weeping, he held up a picture of his late wife who had died in a car crash years ago. ///

Alex, this is so unclear. With triple negatives, the statement should logically end in the negative - that, is the international media did leave out Steiner's medal ceremony. But the subsequent text seems to indicate otherwise. So, what happened? Do you mean "most of the international media didn't leave out Steiner's medal ceremony"?

TAN, Switzerland said...

I agree that being Gay and winning an Olympic Gold or any medal for any sports, is not related, and therefore not a media-attraction for the writers.

Why must it be highlighted?

If it was a Vegetarian who won the Marathon, will it raise a racket?

If it was a Mormon, who won something?

Sports is sports. To mix politics in the guise of gay rights, is simply not correct.

This article smells the same as the Tibetian cause which tried to hijack the Games for their own agenda, be it China wrong or not.

Sports is sports. Please stay out of it, dear politicians.

It is unfair to all sportspeople, gay or not gay.