THE decision by the International Olympic Committee to sell the European TV rights to the Olympics from 2022 onwards is a profound betrayal of principles the movement once held dear.
Juan Antonio Samaranch, the late president of the IOC, will be birling in his grave.
He had firm views on the accessibility of the Olympics on free-to-air TV. It was a significant subject during a Herald interview with him in 1996, to mark the centenary of the Olympic movement.
His view was that, if TV access were restricted to those who can afford satellite, many children would grow up never having the benefit of being influenced or inspired by witnessing the Olympic Games. "They are the greatest show on earth, but have to be seen to be so," he said. "The Olympics belong to the world, and the people of the world have the right to watch them free of charge.''
Discovery Communications, a US media giant, has paid £920 million for the Olympic rights. The Games are "listed events" in Britain, so enjoy some government protection, but indications are that only around 40 per cent of highlight coverage after the Tokio Games in 2022 may be available to the BBC.
Europe is just the thin end of the wedge. Half of the world's population live on less than $2.50 a day, and 80 per cent on less than $10 per day. You can take it none of them has satellite or pay-per-view TV.
TV rights to sport's crown jewels were once the exclusive preserve of the BBC; no more. The best football, the best cricket, rugby, golf, horse-racing, boxing is no longer free to air. The deep pockets of satellite and pay-per-view have claimed them all. Wimbledon is secure only until 2017.
However, the issue is less about the BBC being threatened with loss of Olympic transmission rights than with the Games being unavailable to free terrestrial channels.
If the Olympics have a legacy, then a large measure of that is in inspiring the world's youth and sending out a positive message that sport removes barriers and changes lives.
That was a central plank of the speech Sebastian Coe made in winning London the right to host the 2012 Games. He told the IOC the story of how, just turned 12, he watched the 1968 Olympic 400 metres hurdles final at school in Sheffield, on a 14-inch black and white TV. He saw David Hemery win in Mexico City with a world record, and a Sheffield lad, John Sherwood, taking bronze.
"Who cares who's third," said Coleman. He struggled to show his face in the city following this memorable example of what came to be known as Colemanballs. "That day, missing maths, chemistry, or whatever," was the day he decided what he wanted to do with his life. The rest is history. It is impossible to overstate sport's potential to influence the world for good. That's the true legacy of Olympic and Commonwealth Games. And if they are not free to view for the masses, they lose that influence.
Just days after our interview, Samaranch was in London, announcing that he had rejected rejected the $2000m blandishments of Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp, and accepted $558m less. ``It means the Olympics will be on public TV," he confirmed, and repeated his view that the people of the world have the right to watch them free.
However, the writing was already writ large on the wall. The FA Premier League, the day before, had scooped £670m in a four-year deal with BSkyB and, as the nation rose to read about this over the breakfast table, Samaranch, was already holding court at a celebratory working breakfast marking the contract the IOC had signed with the European Broadcasting Union. The deal guaranteed the rights would stay out of satellite control ... until now.
The very day Samaranch confirmed the EBU deal, chief executives of eight major UK sports had a letter published in one of Murdoch's prints, urging the Government to allow them to negotiate unrestricted with TV. All have now sold out to a great degree to satellite.
The last line on that report in 1996 was that the Olympics would soon be the only game outwith satellite clutches. "Enjoy it while it lasts."
The same injunction remains true today.
Doug Gillon is the award-winning former Athletics Correspondent of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article