An interesting difference in "pandering" on two events: *In field events (jumping and throwing), NBC had to make up their own graphics in feet and inches and they looked nothing like the Olympics style results graphics from the common video feed. I don't know if NBC didn't ask, or IOC didn't accomodate. I think all the field event segments I saw were tape delayed, so maybe NBC decided it was cheaper to make their own. *NBC showed the women's marathon live (6 AM, last Sunday) and we saw the top eight (or so) runners' times at each mile marker in what appeared to be official Olympic results graphics (ie from the common video). Although mile markers exist in every US marathon (and the annual London marathon), I have never seen times collection gear at mile markers and results posted. NBC suppressed the graphics for the 5 km times in their broadcast, but only those, not the mile times, were posted on the results website. To add the infrastructure for collecting mile times is certainly a high level of pandering. I have never seen another marathon do this.
In these two areas, NBC seems to feel the American viewer is unable to understand metric. Yet in many other events (swimming, rowing, water polo, cycling road races, track, etc) NBC coverage was quite metric, with perhaps a single off-hand conversion of the course length to Customary somewhere during the event. Of course, in all of these, the metric was a course length or a rule which affected play, and results were times or points scored. Only in field events are the results a metric distance (that doesn't explain marathon) The economy of pandering is based on two things: *The panderee has deep pockets and some slightly unusual requests. *The panderer is greedy, can fill the unusual requests cheaply, and make an obscene profit. The US and IOC, a match made in heaven. Liberia and Burma couldn't afford special requests and we handily outbid the BWMA and their chains. :) --- On Fri, 8/10/12, Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]> wrote: From: Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [USMA:51837] RE: Metric Olympics To: [email protected], "'U.S. Metric Association'" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, August 10, 2012, 7:43 AM So now we know who the Olympic organisers were pandering to – certainly not the Kenyans or the Somalians. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 10 August 2012 12:13 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:51837] RE: Metric Olympics NBC's coverage of the woman's marathon was the opposite. NBC emphasized the mile markers on the course, and gave times for the top runners at each mile marker. They cut to commercials and avoided most of the 5 kilometer markers. On the two that were shown (20 km and 35 km) no times were given. The only reference to kilometers was a disparging remark "to those who think in metric" about split times at 15 km (they were in commercials as 15 km was crossed, but made a comment about them vs 10 mile times taken a moment or two later). However, on the "results" website, only 5 km (and half) times were shown. For those who can't stand NBC's coverage of field events and marathons, mute the announcers, and watch the results fill in on NBC's results webpage. The updating is nearly real time, a few seconds lag, and 100% metric. And the results page doesn't cut away from the event at a critical point for a stupid puff piece by Mary Carillo. Of course, if the event already happened, and NBC tape-delayed it, the results page is full of spoilers. I see that CBC will cover the next few Olympics for Canada. I am close enough to the border that I can upgrade my antenna and get solid reception (I get marginal now) and totally avoid the abomination that is NBC coverage. --- On Fri, 8/10/12, Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]> wrote: From: Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:51835] RE: Metric Olympics To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Cc: "'Valerie Antoine'" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, August 10, 2012, 5:24 AM The BBC commentary of the woman's marathon showed distances on kilometres (I had a quick look at it to check some bit for the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Olympic_Marathon_Course). -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carleton MacDonald Sent: 10 August 2012 04:18 To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: 'Valerie Antoine' Subject: [USMA:51833] RE: Metric Olympics I was watching today. The event was the discus. The athlete threw the discus and the camera showed where it landed, on a field with arcs clearly marked in meters. Most were hitting ground somewhere between 45 and 50. The American commentator dumbed down the distance to feet and inches and that's how it displayed on the graphic on the TV. It is certain that the Olympic people are not giving NBC feet and inches; someone on staff with a calculator is probably doing it for the broadcaster. Most of the time the NBC commentators give metric figures (swimming, races on track, etc.). What it is about marathons, about throwing things, and about jumping over things, that makes them and the newspaper revert to colonial units? Carleton -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 12:47 To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: Valerie Antoine Subject: [USMA:51828] Metric Olympics One way that you can get more metric coverage is to tune in to the Spanish-language broadcast. Most of the time the prattling commentary is unnecessary anyway (if you don't know Spanish). Yesterday during the shot put, the Spanish coverage reported only metres thrown. In the water polo competition, I was interested to note that the commentators (on the English-language broadcast) were describing distances in metres only. In the swimming competition, I can understand that, because the pool lengths are measured in metres. But in water polo there are no obvious distance markings. I would have thought that the commentators might revert to feet or years, but they didn't. It may well be that metric will be introduced into the United States more by sports than by commerce. Also, through the military. I notice that the Army is using metric units for weapons (millimetres) and distances, using the slang term "click" for a kilometre. The Air Force is somewhat metricated because of international air usage. I surmise that the Navy is the least metricated of the services.
