The media dictates the popularity of sports in Australia
Columnist
By Adrian Musolino, 20 Jan 2010 Adrian Musolino is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Open, Lleyton Hewitt, Tennis
Australia's Lleyton Hewitt reacts to a point win as he plays Marcos Baghdatis of Cyprus in their third round Men's Singles match at the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne, Australia, Saturday, Jan. 19, 2008. AP Photo/Dita Alangkara
We often assume media interest is a barometer of a sports’ popularity. If it’s not at the forefront of priorities for newspaper editors and newsroom producers, then it must not be important and entertaining enough to warrant sufficient media and public interest.
But that logic, in my mind, is flawed.
Rather, it’s the media that is dictating the popularity of various sporting codes and events in Australia.
As an example, observe the current sporting focal point in this country – the Australian Open tennis.
In The Australian, Patrick Smith has written about tennis’ dwindling popularity, and while I fervently disagree with his opinions on the game’s entertainment value, he touches on an important note regarding the media’s role in the popularity of the sport at this time of the year.
He writes: “The Australian Open remains sustained only by a media that frets about what can fill its pages, what to kick off the TV sports news. As with the Sydney-Hobart yacht race, who really gives a damn? If the AFL and rugby league seasons could spread deeper into summer, tennis would be played out merely on the backcourts of the media and public consciousness. As it is, soccer is striding into this holiday vacuum of truly relevant sport.”
What he describes as a “hyped-up fortnight” will dominate the headlines and primetime free-to-air coverage to an extent that few other non-Indigenous sports can do.
There’s no mystery as to why this is so.
Tradition and habit are powerful forces, and many of us have grown up with the Australian Open tennis on Channel 7 each January. It’s ingrained in Australia’s consciousness.
Most of those thousands who tune into Seven’s night sessions won’t follow tennis through its convoluted season, rather it’s a yearly tradition to jump on the tennis bandwagon (to steal a popular phrase from football).
In light of what some, such as Smith, think of the game, there’s hardy been a suggestion questioning why the Australian Open is afforded a fortnight’s worth of prime-time television coverage, despite the fact that Australia hasn’t had a genuine Australian Open contender since the pre-Bec Hewitt days.
It seems set in the sporting constitution of the Australian sporting media that the Australian Open and tennis are guaranteed their spotlight each January.
Other sports would kill for such assurances, let alone such airtime.
What this example proves is how the media dictates the popularity of each individual sport. Without Channel 7’s coverage, for example, would tennis be the main talking point for so many Australians each January? It’s highly doubtful.
Their extensive coverage is not the result of a huge public demand for tennis or an indicator of its popularity rather it is the cause of that interest.
It typifies the power of the media – a concept we Australians should grasp beyond just sports, particularly to understand the agendas and fiscal factors at play in media organisations.
It should also act as a lesson for fringe codes that bemoan their own lack of coverage. They need to do a better job catering to the media in its various forms, so one day they too can hope to entice the sort of free-to-air coverage afforded to tennis.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Other Sports articles
- Victoria Azarenka vs Maria Sharapova: Australian Open women’s final live scores, blog (89)
- Why I won’t be watching the Sharapova-Azarenka final (51)
- The sporting fallacy of the Olympic ‘Games’ (45)
- Djokovic vs Nadal was great, but do we need six-hour finals? (36)
- Sonny Bill needs to start boxing full time (36)
- Sonny Bill looking sharp for his first real test (29)
- Sonny Bill wins title in first round (25)
- London’s Olympic Games have a long way to come (4)
- New champ Williams looking to next fight (4)
- Aust and GB aim to convert 4ths to bronze
- Young pitcher signs big deal with Red Sox (7)
- World Cup Darts heartbreak in Hamburg (3)
- Mayweather and Pacquiao have shamed boxing (12)
- Will Tom Brady’s legacy be affected by one drop? (19)
- London’s Olympic Games have a long way to come (4)
- World Cup Darts heartbreak in Hamburg (3)
- Mayweather and Pacquiao have shamed boxing (12)
- Will Tom Brady’s legacy be affected by one drop? (19)
- Sonny Bill needs to start boxing full time (43)
- Lachlan Murdoch squashing FTA sport for Fox’s benefit (4)
- Sonny Bill Williams vs Clarence Tillman III: Live updates, blog [video] (181)
- Explore:
- Australian Open, Lleyton Hewitt, Tennis
Mr cheese said | January 20th 2010 @ 4:42am | Report comment
I don’t know that I completely follow your argument on this, Adrian.
In England, we have tennis for 2 weeks a year: Wimbledon. It’s 2 weeks of feast followed by 50 weeks of famine. There is a bandwagon of sorts, but you cannot hold a gun to anyone’s head. If people watch Wimbledon on BBC TV, it is because they think it’s good. Andy Murray’s matches last summer got around 12 or 13 million. That’s about 20% of the population, and he isn’t even English !
Isn’t it possible that you have something a little similar down in the colony ? Non-tennis fans will become obsessed for a fortnight and then they will disappear for 12 months. Look at the viewing figures for the NRL and SoO etc. The players’ behaviour has been reprehensible BUT the fans are addicted to the sport. That’s why you still get good ratings for RL.
I am pretty much on the side of the media, I’m afraid. Over here, we have a one-sport culture. Most of the sports coverage goes to football. I don’t necessarily like that, but the newspapers would put a lot of Rugby League on their pages if they found a big audience. There is no big audience for RL in England. C’est tres simple !!!!!!!!!!!!
MyGeneration said | January 20th 2010 @ 6:34am | Report comment
So, tell us, how is the tennis rating for 7 at the moment? “Without Channel 7’s coverage, for example, would tennis be the main talking point for so many Australians each January?” Yes, because Channels 9 or 10 would pick it up in a heartbeat! You may as well argue that cricket’s popularity is due to Channel 9′s coverage, rather than it’s history. Didn’t cricket still rate well when Australia were rubbish in the 80s? Don’t you think some discussion of player participation numbers would be relevant to this discussion? What is the viewing audience for tennis on FTA and cable during the rest of the year?
This is a slipshod chicken-and-egg argument with little evidence supplied and, yes, flawed logic. What’s your agenda here, Adrian? Is this really about tennis, or are you trying to build an argument for the “real” popularity of, let’s see, curling, badminton?
Mister Football said | January 20th 2010 @ 6:53am | Report comment
It sounds supiciously like the old soccer argument for being a backwater in Australia: it’s all the media’s fault!!
Redb said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:10am | Report comment
yeah, Adrian loaded the gun but failed to fire the bullet himself.
Marshall said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:56am | Report comment
I saw no mention of soccer. Think it applies to all codes. Look at what losing free to air tv did to the NBL.
MyGeneration said | January 20th 2010 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
So how did the NBL lose free to air TV, and why didn’t being on free to air TV make it more popular in the first place? Why does the argument being applied to tennis here (that media drives popularity) not apply to the NBL when it was on free to air? From memory, the NBL’s popularity was already waning while it was still on free to air. It certainly never used it’s media presence to make itself a permanent part of the sporting landscape.
AndyRoo said | January 20th 2010 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
My memory of that time was a little vague but I do remember them reforming the league by booting Geelong and the Tassie team which in hindsight seems silly because their exactly the type of markets the NBL has a good chance in.
Al said | January 21st 2010 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Do you do anything except for bashing “soccer” and talking up the great Australian game (or should that be shame)?
Redb said | January 21st 2010 @ 8:31am | Report comment
I think we know who is bashing a sport.
Redb said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:12am | Report comment
The media no doubt manipulates to suit but make no mistake it serves one interest – readers/viewers. If you dont give them what they want they soon drift away.
Punter said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:51am | Report comment
The amount of media attention in Sydney given to AFL is way in advance to the interest shown to this sport in our fair city.
I’m sure Channel nine news in Melbourne don’t lead with RL news in their bulletin, yets Channel 7 & 10 in Sydney sometimes lead with AFL stories & really the interest is just not there. So yes the media is agenda driven as per what I think Adrian is saying here.
Redb said | January 20th 2010 @ 8:01am | Report comment
Seeing as both Ch 7 and 10 hold the AFL TV rights that is not unusual.
All media that owns a TV rights promotes its codes above others, check out Ch 9 Wide World of Sports for all the stories on the NRL on a supposed national TV sports show.
In a wider sense newspapers at least aim to give their readers what they want, sometimes they lead them in a certain direction and dramatise, but if the AGE or Herald Sun simply decided to stop publishing AFL stories and printed only NRL stories their readership would plummett.
I’m not that interested in the tennis, go every second year or so but rarely read a story about it. In today’s AGE there is about 6 pages of tennis in the sport section, didnt read a word. But obviously someone is interested.
Redb
Simmo said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:59am | Report comment
“Seeing as both Ch 7 and 10 hold the AFL TV rights that is not unusual.
All media that owns a TV rights promotes its codes above others, check out Ch 9 Wide World of Sports for all the stories on the NRL on a supposed national TV sports show. ”
You’ve inadvertently agreed with the gist of Adrian’s piece
Marshall said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Exactly. As a follower of netball, I noted how Fox Sports stopped putting articles about the trans Tasman comp on their site. Just a small example of how the media influences a sports popularity as I’m sure that’s impacted their web traction as that’s Australias most popular sports site.
Redb said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:09am | Report comment
Simmo,
It’s a no brainer that if a TV station has the rights it will promote above others, but the article talks the meda dictating which sports are popular in a general sense.
It’s more of a chicken and egg argument.
There is no doubt AFL footy was popular in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth before TV got hold it, in fact that is precisely why they did want to televise it.
Redb
Anthony said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:48am | Report comment
In reply to Punter – the crowds at AFL games in Sydney are usually far in excess of NRL. That alone should result in lead coverage. And AFL is by far the most popular spectator sport in Australia….nice that is acknowleged by the Sydney media!
Springs said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:54am | Report comment
AFL has one game a fortnight in Sydney, NRL usually has around 8.
The Link said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:04am | Report comment
What’s your point? More people in Sydney go to Rugby League games on a weekend than AFL games. And you don’t need to go to a game to want to watch TV or read about a sport, this is all the media care about.
If the Swans crowds are such a barometer of support in Sydney, why are the TV ratings pretty low?
The Swans do well with crowds in Sydney, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into media coverage cause that’s not the sole driver for why people watch TV or read a paper.
Punter said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:25am | Report comment
Anthony, I’m a football fan & would love to see a higher media attention on the A-League. But living in Sydney & being in Pubs, offices, beaches etc, this is an NRL town. I hear about the footy teams around the traps, I hear very little of the A-League or the AFL teams or discussion.
Most sports fans in Sydney can tell you who should or should not be in the NSW state of orgin sides & why, which of the Morris bothers are better finishers, most Sydneysiders would struggle to tell you what position Adam Goodes plays or why John Alosi is out of the Sydney FC team.
Michael C said | January 20th 2010 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
a lot of Melb based AFL fans lose track of where Goodsey is playing – - he’s a traditional ‘utility’ who may just as easily be in the Ruck, playing midfield or key forward.
However – interest on a team by team basis – if you chuck the Swans and SFC into the general pool – - then, where does a Swans story rate vs an Eels story vs a Manly story vs a StGeorge story?? Likewise in Melb, MVFC, will lose out to Collingwood……but, might not vs North Melbourne. It’s not code vs code – - it’s club vs club, because – we know that certain clubs are deemed more newsworthy than others.
Punter said | January 20th 2010 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Michael C, what about Melbourne Storm story up against a Melbourne AFL club team?
Michael C said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
Punter -
at various times Storm do quite well thankyou very much – because, for their regular locked in coverage – it guarrantees a preview article each week, (fluff piece or not), and on radio SEN they have ‘locked in’ segments – - which is more than individual AFL clubs have.
How it balances out compared to each AFL club in Melbourne across the board – that’s hard to know and would vary greatly on any given week. In general – i.e. during H&A season – Storm will be nowhere near Collingwood.
The off season is probably the bigger indicator.
However – there’s a big difference b/w the H-S printed paper and the website – the ‘sports’ homepage far more often carries a Storm thumbnail than even ANY AFL related thumbnail.
Check the H-S sports homepage vs the DT sports homepage. The DT looks like a virtual NRL homepage. The H-S one, looks like they’re deliberately tying to cater to non-AFL types in England!???!!!
Al said | January 21st 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
It is worse in Melbourne, there is almost zero coverage of the A-League or the Victory except for pay TV. Since the AFL took control of SEN, they no longer broadcast Victory games (except on their digital channel which is probably accessibly to 3 people), there are hardly any highlights in the mainstream news sports reports and sometimes not even mention of the scores of any games. The only time however that coverage will be ample is when a soccer “riot” (usually consisting of a 14 year old girl sneezing too loudly) is reported as “soccah violence” by the AFL run media in an attempt to further tarnish the sport and libel its supporters (again).
For the Victory to be getting crowds of 20,000+ without any positive media backing whatsover is impressive.
Redb said | January 21st 2010 @ 8:36am | Report comment
What rubbish. Melb Victory get mentioned in sports report on both Ch 9 and 10 in the news.
The AGE sponsor Victory ensuring a steady stream of articles and the Herald Sun now sponsor Melb Heart.
Victory are one just 1 club with 10 other AFL clubs , all with similiar size (except Ess, Coll & Carl) regular supporter bases.
AFL club membership – 400,000
Victory membersip – 20,000.
That’s 20 to 1. The media would be crazy to ignore those numbers and they don’t.
ItsCalledFootball said | January 20th 2010 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
AFL TV ratings in Sydney are pathetic – they get a lot of people at games, mainly ex-southerners now living and working in Sydney. No one else cares.
The number one football code in Australia is football.
Australian Football said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Yes how true the media is the key who ever controls the media is the one that will catch the pundits attention… With no visible Football media in the market place the public will turn their attention to what is… AFL have had a saturated media dream run up in the northern states only because of their greater sponsorship deals… But nothing stays the same for ever.. The tide will turn and twist and turn until Football is eventually given the proper respect with more sponsors coming on board it so richly deserves, because its global appeal, and when that happens, the gap will close with a much different sporting landscape and the media will then want to push Football because of the greater sponsorship dollars in the game.. More Sponsors = More Media..
~~~~~~
AF
BigAl said | January 20th 2010 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
. . . KB – different name, same old game !
Australian Football said | January 20th 2010 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
Give the man a cigar… Now if you were paying attention Big Al I had informed every one of my new moniker and name change in honour of the Australian National Football Team to compete in the 2010 Football World Cup at the start of the New Year….
MVDave and Art Sapphire will attest to that fact—- I have even given myself a proper profile— unlike Mr Football who is really Pippi sneaking through the backdoor unannounced with new name and identity to boot… Come clean Mr Football, Big Al wants to know….
~~~~~~
AF
BigAl said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
Really ! – well it’s all not that important…
BTW speaking of paying attention, my moniker is BigAl not Big Al ! has been for years, – and you havn’t got it right once !
Australian Football said | January 20th 2010 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
Ah but yes, BigAl is grammatically incorrect… Big Al is much better, but if you wish …
BigAL sorry BigAl, got it..!
simon said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:26am | Report comment
While it’s hard to argue that the popularity of a sport is entirely due to the media (and so I think Adrian has probably overstated his case), there is no doubt that without the media, there would be far, far less interest in that particular sport.
This also aplies to AFL and NRL BTW.
While the media would only ‘back’ a sport because they think there is a significant market for it, it is also true that it is in the media’s interest to make that sport bigger than it is.
This is why it’s so important for a sport to be on FTA TV.
Sam el Perro said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:57am | Report comment
If it didn’t rate, it wouldn’t be on TV. Simple.
Marshall said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Yeah but it’s not hard to get things to rate, is it? Look at reality tv. Australian television is a lot less cut throat than American and so we rarely see ratings bombs. We have a lot fewer choices for one.
Lazza said | January 20th 2010 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
The Summer non-ratings period is different. They need programming, any programming, to fill the void and if it gets a ‘pulse’ in the ratings then that will do. Cricket gets plenty of coverage during Summer but the Ashes in England are on SBS during the Winter months.
Michael C said | January 20th 2010 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
and the AShes gave SBS their best ratings for the year. (at least to that point in time). SBS paid a commercial rate for them….and SBS also broadcast the Soccer World Cup.
actually some slightly better presenters might’ve improved figures more so!!
Here we go – a link Ashes smashes SBS records from back in 2005.
“SBS last Sunday posted its highest rating ever as England defeated Australia in a thrilling climax to the second Test at Edgbaston.”
“That night, between 7.15pm and 9.30pm, the broadcaster grabbed 1.12 million viewers. Between 9.05pm and 9.10pm, SBS’s audience swelled to just over two million.”
The impact for SBS was summed up by Les Murray:
Murray said the Ashes ratings had lifted SBS’s year to date average overall rating to 5.6 per cent.
Last year’s result was an overall share of 5.1 per cent.
But Murray said he didn’t think Nine would be too upset over SBS’s success, having passed up on the rights for the series.
“I don’t think they’d be heartbroken,” he said.
“Their ratings are still high and they’re still winning.
He said it was a harder decision for Nine to broadcast the series.
“In order to put the cricket on they would have to be certain that the cricket is going to outrate their existing programs,” Murray said.
“We always knew that the cricket would outrate our existing programs, so for us it was an easy decision.”
MattRusty said | January 20th 2010 @ 8:20am | Report comment
The same argument can be used for the Spring Racing Carnival, Valentines Day and Xmas.
It’s ingrained in our culture – good luck trying to change that. I think the lesson for the ‘lesser codes that bemoan’ is, create an event people want to be involved with and the media will latch on to it (not the other way around).
M1tch said | January 20th 2010 @ 8:25am | Report comment
No doubt, the media has sports they want to promote and some they dont..I think we all know which Sports the media loves and media loves to criticize.
Michael C said | January 20th 2010 @ 11:29am | Report comment
well – we do know that there are Media companies with ownership conflict of interest (eg News Ltd ownership stake in NRL and of clubs past and present)
we do know that there are media sponsorship of clubs/codes etc – such as the Age and MVFC and SMH and SFC,
we do know that Sports bodies write in contractual obligation (contra) into broadcast deals – such as AFL with Ch7 and Ch10,
and we know that media has an interest in cross promotion of their own sports ‘content’,
HOWEVER – look at the cricket for example – the domestic T20 is on Foxtel. You don’t see much discussion of this ‘competing’ form of cricket on Ch.9 Test Coverage. It’s all cricket – - but, it’s in direct media competition.
Likewise, Ch.10 will only promote footy (AFL) that it has rights to, fair enough. And Ch.7 will only promote footy (AFL) that it has rights to. Other than the ‘code’ specific ‘preview/review’ programs……..ahh….but even there, Ch.10 ensure that their offerings of Before the Game and the 5th Quarter are saturday specific – - thus only promoting the AFL matches that occurred on their (Ch 10s) day of coverage.
What IS odd – is the example of Channel 9 running AFL shows such as the Footy Show, the Sunday Footy Show, TAC Cup Future Stars and the like – when, they don’t have the current broadcast rights. As we don’t see (or do we in Sydney – I wouldn’t really know) Ch7 or Ch10 pushing RL content in NSW/QLD.
At the end of the day though – we know the media recognize that there’s nothing better than a good scandal, beat up, cross code warfare etc etc. Far, far easier to sell than a cute fluff piece about someone doing charity work and improving their 2nd efforts.
kick,clap,kick said | January 20th 2010 @ 8:35am | Report comment
The amount of media attention in Sydney given to AFL is way in advance to the interest shown to this sport in our fair city.
I’m sure Channel nine news in Melbourne don’t lead with RL news in their bulletin, yets Channel 7 & 10 in Sydney sometimes lead with AFL stories & really the interest is just not there. So yes the media is agenda driven as per what I think Adrian is saying here.
Spot on Punter…..but when they forked out the big cash for something & find that it gets flogged in the ratings by 30yr old movies ,you can’t blame them for trying to get people interested……sadly forcing it down the throats of uninterested people just turns them off more.
You can guarantee that if 7or 10 buy the RL rights,then in Qld & NSW,AFL will get a massive reduction in news time…comparible to its popularity in those states.
Mick said | January 20th 2010 @ 8:41am | Report comment
Alot of the media belong in the world is flat school & if you travel far enough you will eventually fall of the edge which Patrick Smith thinks the Aust Open should be
ohtani's jacket said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:14am | Report comment
God forfbid Australia could host a sporting event that Australians aren’t successful at. That’s so un-Australian.
Redb said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:26am | Report comment
Really?
Australia has hosted the Olympics twice, the Commonwealth games 3-4 times, the rugby World Cup, the cricket World Cup, 1 of only 4 tennis grand slams in the world for 50+ years, F1 Grand Prix for 20 years, motor cycle Grand Prix, swimming World Champs, world triathlons, cycling, golf tournaments with occasional world class fields and we are bidding for the soccer World Cup!
you were saying?
Redb
Robbo said | January 20th 2010 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Redb – I think OJ was being sarcastic.