In an earlier post today I took poor Emily Dugan to task for her churnalistic efforts, pointing to the datasets on the London 2012 budget published by the Guardian. In fairness it can't be that easy to dig out the truth from the smorgasbord of possible truths laid before us. Controversial enough is the widespread popular belief - not just amongst journalists - that the budget remains around £9billion. OK, factor in the externalities and news sources such as Sky could have us believe that including the hidden costs the real budget can easily have been as much as £24billion. Who knows?
Submitted by Steve Dowding on Fri, 19/07/2013 - 16:14.
Tis the season to be jolly and publish utter bullshit about legacies it seems, it being one year on.
Emily Dugan provides an excellent example for The Independent, notably this one-liner
Submitted by Steve Dowding on Fri, 19/07/2013 - 11:07.
Submitted by Steve Dowding on Fri, 05/07/2013 - 16:42.
It's Not For Us
This paper examines the much-hyped 2012 Olympic Games ‘legacy’ in relation to the displacement experiences of lower-income East Londoners. The paper begins by outlining the overall context of housing-related regeneration including the reduced role for social housing, especially council (public) housing in London.
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Wed, 12/06/2013 - 08:18.
The fraught disputes over how best to recoup the high construction and maintenance costs of the London Olympic stadium conform to a pattern previously seen elsewhere in England and abroad. The story of the Don Valley stadium in Sheffield provides a cautionary tale of how the visionary delusions of ambitious politicians end up ruining the chances of ordinary people gaining adequate access to affordable opportunities for healthy recreation.
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Wed, 01/05/2013 - 16:05.
Alexandra Wrage is the president of TRACE, "an organization that provides sane, cost-effective compliance solutions to the problem of international commercial bribery". She served, for a time, on the Independent Governance Committee of FIFA, football’s governing body. She recently resigned due to a perceived lack of progress from the organisation in improving internal transparency.
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Fri, 26/04/2013 - 10:35.
In a house in the London suburb of Ealing, hired for the occasion by a film company, an actor playing the part of an average guy, is checking in a mirror how he looks in his recently bought shirt. Out from behind the mirror steps the winner of the recent Olympic women’s heptathlon who reels off some spiel about a 2% discount. The actor/guy plays gobsmacked that this princess should emerge from behind his mirror, announce some cashback offer then humiliate him over his new shoes.
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Thu, 28/03/2013 - 20:00.
Did Boris have a favourite lilo he used to float around on when he was young? After his ‘Olympic legacy’ floating park on the Thames ‘sank’ into oblivion it seems he has been using bath time to dream up some more lilo type developments for the river and the Royal docks. Boris’ original idea was criticised by objectors as ‘an unwelcome intrusion’ into the river. The Port of London Authority was also unhappy and considered his watery park would be a ‘navigation hazard’. His new plan for homes floating in the Docks has been panned as a ‘Titanic mistake’ by London City Airport campaigner Alan Haughton who says ‘The Royal Docks contains the London City Airport Public Safety Zone - also called a crash zone. The Department for Transport strictly forbids development in a Crash Zone’.
Submitted by Julian Cheyne on Tue, 26/03/2013 - 14:28.
The BBC describes the Stadium deal as an "unavoidable marriage". We're left to wonder exactly how much Newham paid for the wedding present?. Coe's concerns weren't for footie of course or he'd have done some research:
"Whisper it quietly, but football fans rarely want to watch football in an Olympic Stadium".
Submitted by Steve Dowding on Mon, 25/03/2013 - 09:51.
A fascinating little boosterist gem from the Standard. First, it reports that Carat, 'one of Britain’s biggest media-buying agencies', says there was no boost in 2012 to advertising from the London Olympics. Well, that's in line with most other results and easy enough to understand. But then, second, we are told Carat expects higher growth in 2013, even though there are no mega events. Third, 2014 should be 'even stronger thanks to the football World Cup'. 'Even stronger'? Why 'even' stronger? 2012 showed no boost so what 'even stronger' growth can 2014 produce? And as the Olympics did not boost advertising in 2012 why should advertising grow in 2014 'thanks' to the World Cup? Fourth, the article rounds off saying Carat thinks 'Brazil and Russia should see double-digit increases as they host the World Cup and Winter Olympics.' London showed no boost in growth despite hosting the Olympics yet Brazil and Russia are expected to show double-digit growth because they are hosting these mega events?
Submitted by Julian Cheyne on Thu, 21/03/2013 - 02:28.