Ask HN: What caused the Olympics to become so terrible?

1. We have other ways to connect globally thanks to the internet, so we don’t need the Olympics to see a shallow representation of each country. YouTube is a better view into other cultures.

2. We are more aware of the impact and drawbacks of the Olympics, like the costs and associated corruption. It is incredibly irresponsible for any city to volunteer to host it.

3. The politics of the Olympics is not new but it is much more visible and easy to recognize, and that turns viewers off. Things like China having a female Uyghur light the Olympic torch.

4. We have other, better forms of entertainment that use up our limited time.

5. I think collectively there’s a pullback from broadcast sports even as there is a renewed interest in participating in sports personally. It’s not just the politics of it, although that has become a focus even outside the Olympics (NFL NBA etc). It’s that there is an absurdity to caring about what someone achieves when they throw away the rest of their life and just focus on a sport. Someone with that kind of focus in the interest of science is capable of producing lasting impact and move humanity forward. But with mass sports it’s just entertainment and vanity. I think there’s a rising consciousness around this aspect.

> One of those performing the symbolic act was the Chinese cross-country skier Dinigeer Yilamujiang, who is of Uyghur heritage... That, to put it mildly, was a highly provocative act.

China gave an Uyghur person this high honor. It seems like a positive gesture. How is it provocative? Black people face systemic abuse in the US, are routinely shot by the police and form a persistent underclass but the US had Muhammad Ali light the flame in the '96 Atlanta Games. Was that a provocative act?

> For no amount of odes to peaceful coexistence can hide the fact that these Games will be the most controversial and difficult since Moscow in 1980. Perhaps even Berlin 1936.

More controversial than the Berlin games!? The author doesn't back up this well at all. The author also makes regular Olympics things seem sinister. e.g.

> When Xi was introduced to the crowd of around 25,000 bussed-in spectators before the ceremony began, TV cameras captured him waving and accepting applause for longer than usual, as if he was accepting several encores before the Games had even started.

This happens everywhere but he makes it sound negative.

> The fact that the US, Britain, Canada and others are staging a diplomatic boycott in protest at China’s human rights record is obviously a major factor.

US, Britain and Canada have beef with China and are using the Games politically. Nothing wrong with that but it doesn't make the Games and more or less controversial. US, UK and Can have previously not boycotted Olympics and other sporting events in other authoritarian regimes.

> But the severe Covid restrictions, athletes in quarantine, the lack of real snow, and a shortage of spectators are significant too.

Tokyo also had COVID restrictions. Vancouver and other Winter Games have used snow machines in the past plenty as well. The author mentions later "Earlier, when crowds arrived at the Bird’s Nest stadium they were handed hats and blankets to protect them from the freezing conditions". It does snow in Beijing and it was cold – it is not their fault it didn't snow.

> Within the first 15 minutes, a Chinese flag was also passed through a crowd of people said to represent ethnic groups across the country, while soldiers carrying the flag were then seen marching across the stadium.

The author makes this sound negative and propoganda-y. But in the Vancouver Olympics, the Conservative Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper sat with various First Nation Chiefs, but they're otherwise treated poorly in Canada. US often has soldiers even in non-national sporting events.

All in all, this is appalling and not what I expected from The Guardian!