What A Twit

If TigerBlog had to pick a city to go to that he's never been to before, he might pick London.

Or maybe Pittsburgh, if for no other reason than to get one of those sandwiches were they put the french fries right on top, the sandwiches that anyone who has ever lived in Pittsburgh swears by.

Or London.

TB has always wanted to go there, and the early days of the 2012 Summer Olympics have done nothing to change his mind. The city has been by far the biggest winner to date, with one extraordinary view after another, all capturing the history, charm and vitality of one of the world's most famous municipalities.

Too bad it's in the worst possible time zone for American television, sitting five hours ahead of the Eastern part of the United States.

TigerBlog isn't quite ready to excuse NBC's coverage, which hasn't exactly been good. Still, he's not going to pile on everyone who is complaining about the showing of tape-delayed events in primetime.

Obviously, it's incredibly easy to find out who won the event that NBC is saving for its primetime slots. And obviously nobody really wants to watch events when they know how they end.

Then again, what exactly is NBC supposed to do?

If it televises the events live, then they'd be on in the morning and afternoon. What would they show at night? TB loved the World Cup, with live games at 7 and 9:30 am and sometimes 2:30 in the afternoon, but there was no pretense of having hours and hours of programming during the evening hours.

And it's not like the Olympics in China four years ago, when events could be contested live in the morning in Beijing and have them be live in the United States.

What would you do if you were in charge of NBC's Olympic coverage? 

You want to draw audiences as large as possible, which means primetime, but you have not one second of live events to show during those time slots, which are after midnight in London.

What would you do? Show the events live and then again in primetime? Show them live and then do highlights/features and such in primetime? That'd be tough to do, considering the sheer amount of hours you'd have to fill.

Maybe NBC should show things like swimming, track and field and gymnastics live during the day and then show highlights of those, along with all of the other sports (like team handball, fencing, canoeing and all the cool stuff that people don't usually get to see), at night.

 Or maybe NBC doesn't care, because, as TB read somewhere, much of its audience in primetime is made up of people who don't usually watch sports.

TB's biggest problem with NBC - other than that the beach volleyball announcers insist on calling them "Misty" and "Kerry" instead of their last names, something that comes across as amateurish cheerleading and makes TB want to scream - is the continued over-presentation of all things American, coupled with the usual amount of overcome tragedy and blurring of the line between covering sports and fabricating entertainment sprinkled in.

Okay, we get it. The gymnast girl is crying. Every one move along.

It seems that televising the Olympics should be so simple. Show the events. Show the host city. Show Kobe Bryant at the women's volleyball match. So easy. It doesn't have to be overdone, over-hyped.

Anyway, NBC has been crucified on Twitter, which is where TB has gotten the majority of his Olympic results, updates and commentary. Some of it has been hilarious.

The other side of Twitter is the Greek triple-jumper who got bumped from competing because of something she tweeted just before the Games began.

TB saw it and isn't really commenting on whether or not it was racist. Whatever it was, it certainly wasn't very smart of her to say.

The question is more about whether or not the punishment was fitting.

TB's biggest problem with disciplining athletes for comments they make is that it's not clear where the line is and who gets to say what is okay and what is not okay. You - triple jumper - you're out. You - guy who said something offensive but not quite exactly as offensive? You can stay.

TB struggles with that. In his mind, everyone - including athletes - have the right to be jerks if they so choose.

The incident sparked a discussion here about what responsibility athletes in general have to be role models, per se, and whether or not they should be penalized for saying/tweeting offensive things - for being jerks.

TB says no.

And what about Princeton athletes? Should the same logic apply to them?

If they want to be jerks and tweet offensive things, do they forfeit their right to compete here? Should they?

TB understands that if a Princeton athlete went on Twitter and said something clearly racist or homophobic or such that there would be ramifications.

Should there be?

Well, in a practical way, it'd be hard for that person to fit into a stable team culture in the face of something like that.

But again, TB struggles with the idea of what's acceptable and what isn't, who decides what's too offensive, what can be dismissed as humor and what can't be. What if it's not racist or homophobic but is critical of the coach? What if it's laced with f bombs?

Who decides?

Fortunately, that hasn't happened here.

Hopefully it won't.

Just because TB thinks people have the right to be jerks doesn't mean he wants them to exercise that right.