The already-delayed Tokyo Olympics is two months away. While a decision is yet to be made about spectators at the grand event, even the bare minimum people attending the event are expected to be in thousands, including around 11,000 athletes, their coaches, 78,000 volunteers, 10,000 medical staff, and media personnel from hundreds of organisations. So far, neither the Japanese government nor the International Olympics Commission (IOC) has called off the world’s biggest sporting event, despite the evident risk of it potentially hosting the world’s biggest coronavirus superspreader event. Despite the looming public health danger, Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga’s administration remains determined to carry on with the event because it would be proof of the country’s victory over the virus. However, can these apparently conflicting goals of protecting public health and conducting the Olympics be reconciled?
As fresh lockdowns and states of emergency in Tokyo and other Japanese prefectures continue to drag on, public frustration with the pandemic and the new government that took office just eight months ago is also on the rise. A recent poll by Kyodo News showed that 80% of the local population wants the games to be further postponed or cancelled altogether. Simultaneously, Suga’s approval ratings have also nosedived to their lowest point since he took office. A survey released on May 10 by broadcaster JNN found that 40% of the respondents said they supported Mr Suga, down 4.4% from a month earlier. Public dissatisfaction is further rooted in the fact that the vaccine rollout in Japan has been slow, with only 1% of the population having been inoculated with both shots since the mass drive began in mid-February.
While some sports such as gymnastics, weight lifting, figure skating, swimming, athletics, archery, shooting and the likes of it can be held remotely in individual countries and referees can be sent to assure fairness and consistency in the competition, doing the same with other disciplines, especially contact sports like fencing, handball, field hockey, rugby etc will be impossible to hold via an online medium. In case the IOC does succumb to public pressure and decide to hold some of these events online, there is far too little time left now to plan and ascertain consistency in competing factors, as the Olympics begins on July 23. At the same time, the risk factor in holding contact sports in Tokyo still remains high. as athletes will not just be in physical contact with each other but also go back to friends and family.
Moreover, for the sporting disciplines that need to be conducted in person in Tokyo, there is no stipulation for athletes and associated personnel to get vaccinated in order to participate. Although vaccination is encouraged and being paid for by the Japanese government if athletes do decide to get inoculated, the only requirement to participate in person is to show negative test results on arrival in Tokyo and to be tested daily. While the regulations are stringent, they have still left onlookers uneasy about the potential spread of the virus.
Another way to include new viewership while maintaining social distancing norms has been the long-awaited inclusion of online gaming this year. While the 2022 Asian Games in Hangzhou China, has officially included eSports, or computer gaming, in their main roster, the IOC is yet to make eSports part of its showcase event. The committee did announce that it would be organising a slate of five esports events to be staged ahead of the main event. This year's Olympic Virtual Series, which began on May 13, features competitions in auto racing, baseball, cycling, rowing, and sailing. Although these are not part of traditional Olympic sports, their inclusion this year is a step closer to furthering digital engagement and also in hopes to reel in new audiences. However, the unconventional category is so niche and under-advertised that it will not be able to attract the same viewership size as traditional Olympic sports. While the inclusion of eSports, however cursory, does illustrate the changing times, the ability of computer gaming to challenge traditional sports in terms of viewership and financial viability remains a far-fetched and distant goal.
The sheer amount of money invested by the Japanese government and the IOC in conducting the games is evidently the number one driving factor behind why common public health wisdom is being ignored. According to official audits, $15 billion has already been invested in the program. Although the IOC has time and again said that it puts its athletes first, athletes themselves have expressed apprehensions regarding the event and its possible public health repercussions. While the IOC will be able to generate substantial revenue from broadcasters if the event goes ahead as planned, the Japanese government will end up footing the undoubtedly huge bill that would result from a prospective COVID-19 outbreak from the event, the likelihood of which is much higher without compulsory vaccination. Regardless of the billions that have been poured into the event, these financial costs would pale in comparison to the long-term financial impacts of a potential viral outbreak at the Olympics, which could not only invite a human tragedy but also overwhelm the nation’s healthcare system.
While financial losses will be high, the IOC and the Japanese government must cancel the event in the greater interest of mankind. This is especially pertinent when neighbouring countries like India are reaping the tragic outcomes of government mismanagement, oversights in preparation, and misplaced confidence that the virus could be or has been contained. While it is true that the Olympics represent the hallmark event of most athletes’ lives and that they bring together millions of people from across the globe, it is clear that the costs of conducting the Olympics are far outweighed by the risks to public health. Moreover, the alternatives to hosting the Olympics are simply not viable, especially given the time left between now and when the Games start. However, seeing as the Japanese government and the IOC appear reluctant to cancel the Olympics despite these risks, it may fall on individual countries and athletes to boycott the event, either out of concern for their own health or that of others.
This Is No Time To Host The Olympics
Hosting the Olympics in person this year is a public health tragedy waiting to happen. The human cost far outweighs the financial cost of cancelling the grand event.
May 14, 2021
SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES