The International Olympic Committee (IOC) this week reaffirmed a contentious rule that bans athletes from engaging in political speech or silent acts of protest, specifically stating that the phrase “Black Lives Matter” would be banned at this year’s games in Tokyo, Japan.
Taking a knee or lifting a fist in support of racial equality during the games would not be allowed, the IOC said. Athletes would also be barred from wearing shirts or other apparel with the phrase “Black Lives Matter” on them.
Details were scant on how protests or political actions may be punished, but athletes competing in the Olympics can face punishment from one or more of three separate bodies: the IOC itself, the governing body of their specific sport, and their home country’s Olympic committee.
The decision is based on the IOC reaffirming Rule 50 of the games, which restricts any type of “demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda” by athletes at Olympic venues.
“The aim of Rule 50 is to ensure that each and every athlete can experience the Olympic Games without any divisive disruption,” the IOC’s website says.
The governing authority of the games based its choice to uphold Rule 50 in part on a survey it sent out to athletes and organizations, IOC Athletes’ Commission chief Kirsty Coventry explained, noting that a majority of responses were in favor of keeping the rule in place.
“I would not want something to distract from my competition and take away from that,” Coventry, herself a former Olympic athlete, added. “That is how I still feel today.”
Despite the survey that the IOC cited for making its decision, several sports organizations spoke out against it. Global Athlete, a progressive athlete start-up movement, took note of the survey in April and released a statement at the time decrying the idea that a person’s human rights might be determined by a vote.
“One cannot survey how people feel about human rights and freedom of expression,” said Global Athlete member Caradh O’Donovan, an Irish Karate athlete and a world champion kickboxer. “These types of surveys only empower the majority when it is the minority that want and need to be heard.”
Citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Global Athlete added in its statement that “the Olympic podium is a media of communication to the world, and the Olympic frontier cannot be a barrier to human rights.”
Responding to the IOC’s decision, Brendan Schwab, executive director of The World Players Association, said that the organization would support athletes who still planned to protest. “Any athlete sanctioned at the Tokyo Olympics will have the full backing of the World Players,” Schwab said.
Some on social media accused the IOC of racism for its decision to take direct action against athletes who may have planned to highlight “Black Lives Matter” at the games.
The IOC “specifically deciding that Olympians can’t wear [Black Lives Matter] attire or ‘protest’ on the podium is for what reason other than racism?” asked Shahara’Tova Dente, an English instructor at the University of Alabama, in a tweet. “Seriously needing an answer as to why that was a necessary focus when the whole Olympics was postponed because of a damn pandemic.”
Color of Change, a racial justice organization, also condemned the decision by the IOC. Their policies “are a direct assault on the free expression of Black athletes by a commission that includes no Black members,” the group noted.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.