Tomous wrote:Octoroc wrote:Some vacuous hand-wringing from Gaby Logan:
This time, we should remember the treatment of the migrant workers involved in the vast construction project for this tournament - including the gleaming new stadiums that will be seen around the world - and instead judge Qatar on whether some of the issues I have mentioned do change and get better in the future.
Yes, let's not judge Qatar on things they have done, instead let's judge them on things that haven't happened yet.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63607874
But as my colleague Gary Lineker has already said, the BBC will be in Qatar reporting, not supporting the regime there and elements of what they stand for.
Does anyone agree with this? In my opinion, if you're there to report on human right abuses then I agree. If you're there to report on a World Cup your complicit in sportwashing and therefore supporting the regime.
I wouldn't call people reporting on the actual football as being complicit in sportswashing necessarily, much as I wouldn't label a reporter reporting on a military parade in Pyongyang as being complicit in supporting the Kim regime. Maybe not a perfect analogy, but things happen that people want to know about, reporters need to report etc.
I think for the UK commentators and punditry teams that are going over there, they should be allowed to comment on the football without drawing undue criticism. They aren't being paid by Qatar (unlike Gary Neville and the rest of the BeIN Sports crew, the knobheads) so aren't complicit. I mean it wouldn't hurt for them to highlight the more serious issues, and I'm sure they will, but I don't think it's realistic for them to mention that stuff continually - how do you even do that in general punditry?
It's going to be
really interesting to see how it's all handled.