Elentári wrote:Well, perhaps this thread is indicative of North American attitudes...it should have been renamed the 2010 Olympics US/Canada supporters review of the Games. If it had been I would have known not to bother posting in it, since the majority of members here are American or Canadian, and apparently have no interest in the performances of other nation's athletes unless they impact on their own competitors.
To be straightforward, we have
a lot of successful athletes, and following them consumes as much time as many of us have. My approach, for instance, is that I follow whatever sports I'm personally interested in (figure skating, swimming, gymnastics) - in these sports, I try to know what's going on with all the top athletes regardless of nationality. Also with respect to these sports, I want to see them push the outer limits of their sport (particularly re: swimming). Who wins is secondary to me, though I'm always excited when Americans win. (Exception: figure skating at the moment - I find Kim Yu-Na so spectacular that I think I will always root for her no matter what Americans are in the mix.) With respect to other sports, I rely on the media and friends to tell me if something really cool happened. Given that I live in California, guess who they're talking about?
With this Olympics, my knowledge of other sports came mainly from Stephen Colbert, who was in Canada to provide his "Vancouverage" of the Games. He interviewed primarily American medalists, and I essentially then went and looked up the clips of their competition from NBCOlympics.com (e.g. Shaun White, Shani Davis). And, apart from women's figure skating, that's been as much time as I've had to follow these Games.
I can honestly say that this doesn't happen on British - or European tv. Maybe it's because Britain obviously doesn't have many home successes to discuss...
To be honest, I think it does, when you guys feel you're really in the mix (perhaps to a lesser extent, though I think it's a numbers game.) I was in the UK for the summer 2008 Games, and where Rebecca Adlington (y'all's top long-distance swimmer who won a couple of golds) was around, that's what the swimming coverage talked about. It didn't bother me at all - that's how I imagined it should be! I had forgotten about it until this discussion. Similarly, I was in Italy last summer when the swimming world championships were being held in Rome. I watched on Italian TV, with my Milanese friend translating for me. Where there were serious Italian competitors, that was definitely the focus of the commentary, and the Italians commented on other teams primarily where they were going to give Italy a run for their money (i.e., we still heard a lot about Michael Phelps and the American relay teams, for instance.) Again, it didn't bother me at all that Italians would want to focus on the achievements of Italian athletes, particularly during a "home" world championship. Ultimately, my friend and I both cheered our teams on loudly, patriotically, and unabashedly during the relays, and (after the American men won
), we went out for tasty Italian food, and my friend and the waiters lightly mocked my Americanness and accent. I thought it was exactly the way it should be.
So, in essence, part of this might be "our fault" - we (Americans, and perhaps Canadians) are wrapped up in our own athletes, and there's A LOT of achievement for us to focus on just there. I've seen nothing in my European experiences yet that convinces me that you guys are different in your approach, except that where you have fewer athletes to focus on for a particular sport, perhaps you pay more attention to everyone. (I think we do the same - I definitely paid a lot more attention to all the women's figure skaters this time, since the top contenders weren't American.)
More broadly, though, I respectfully submit that part of the problem is that
everyone pays too much attention to us, not only in the Olympic context. For my own reasons, I've become very interested in what's going on in Britain. I've noticed, for instance, that when I read The Economist -- ostensibly a British publication that offers a British perspective on the world, it always starts with discussion of American news, and almost always offers more pages of discussion on the US than on the UK. (e.g., in this past week's issue, 33-42 were US and 63-66 UK). Ironically, that may be because half of the publication's subscribers are North American, but it's frustrating to me because I know what's going on with the US, and would like the Economist to tell me more about what's happening in the UK. I go to the BBC's webpage to read the British news, and almost invariably see
only global headlines on the first page. I have to scroll to the bottom for the link to UK news. "No, really, Britain, what's going on
with you?"
I'm not sure that I have an overarching point. Just some reactions to what you wrote.
, which is pretty much the whole point.
. 
to both teams for giving us some wonderful entertainment
I shake my head, but I laugh, too. 
Although to be honest, we aren't on coffee drinking terms or anything . . . 
(I'd never heard of the sport before.