General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm gonna say it...
I love the Olympics, whatever the sport. These people are all gifted almost beyond comprehension.
However, the interviewers ask the most insipid questions and worse yet, essentially rephrase the previous question and ask it again. And again. And again. I was just watching the interview of the baseball player who played on our Silver Medal team, and the questions
OMFG.
No depth, no insight, no knowledge of the sport is required to ask:
How did you feel when
What were you thinking when
When did you realize
Formulaic and grotesquely insipid. Im sorry for the rant but you know what? This is how the media treat Republican politicians:
How upset were you when you heard that the hospitals in your undervaccinated congressional district are full? Not:How can you live with yourself after you told your constituents not to mask or social distance, and the hospitals are full of Covid patients? Never that
.well, almost never
.
elleng
(130,865 posts)SOME of the play-by-play dialog is useful, but some/most insipid; disappointing.
Tetrachloride
(7,834 posts)Deuxcents
(16,190 posts)PBS had a documentary on Jesse Owens at the 1936 Olympics. 4 gold medals in track..he was something.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)unblock
(52,196 posts)These are elimination tournaments, but with increasing payouts the longer you last.
So maybe 1,000 players paid $600 each. But they only show the final table of the 9 top players.
Maybe 9th place pays $15,000 on up to 1st paying $120,000.
Every time someone gets knocked out, they ask them some variant of "are you disappointed."
First off, *everyone* except the one winner gets knocked out at some point. So it's silly to basically imply that 999 players out of 1,000 are inevitably disappointed.
Second, c'mon, 9th place turns $600 into $15,000. Sure, a lot more was so close, but really, why not suggest that maybe $15,000 is a sweet payout?