The Intercultural Communication in the Sports and Politics - Essay Example

Intercultural Communication Through Sports Diplomacy Introduction Though the world has become a global village where people interact easily, there are many avenues where individuals can meet despite their differences in culture; in terms of language, religion, socio-economic status and political affiliation (Hu & Fan, 2011). Sports have become major worldwide events that bring people together and have also been used to influence relationships between nations. In this regard, sports diplomacy has become common in the contemporary world where the concept refers to using sports to influence political, social and diplomatic relations (Murray, 2013). On the other hand, sporting events defy cultural differences thus it can be a perfect reference for explaining how communication differs in various cultural contexts. Though sports activities have always been fancied worldwide, it has both negative and positive impacts on the society (Murray, 2012). The Apartheid regime, for instance, used sports to suppress the local social structure and was another way of isolating the South Africans. Conversely, sporting events have been lauded for blending differences despite people hailing from different ethnic and racial backgrounds. The implication is that sports have the potential for increasing social capital where people interact easily and forget their differences (Lee, Cornwell & Babiak, 2013). The success of sports influencing relations between individuals depends on the intercultural communication. Therefore, it is imperative to outline the importance of sports in shaping political relations or diplomacy and also improving intercultural communication among the individuals. Using sports to influence political relations The sports events like the Olympics and the World Cup though are more about sports have been used over time to engage in high levels of public diplomacy (Murray, 2013). In this case, the sporting events are useful in undertaking Intercultural Public Relations. However, even when engaging in public diplomacy, those in charge resort to using language that is acceptable to all the people from different backgrounds thus contributing to a large extent in influencing intercultural communication (Baraldi, 2015). On the other hand, using sport in changing public relations or political relations is a means through which nation brand themselves. For instance, the 2014 Olympics games in Russia were overshadowed by Vladimir Putin’s passing of anti-gay laws before the games kicked off (Persson & Petersson, 2014). Putin had to respond to public and media attention. In response, the USA media portrayed how Russia was not in the same league of human rights as the rest of the world. Therefore, the Russian example shows how sporting events are being used as platforms for airing political differences and also at the time being crucial to influencing other societies to embrace tolerance. Nonetheless, the fight for political supremacy through sports entails engaging in intercultural communication where nations use language that is accepted by the rest of the world as a community (Allen, 2011). For instance, in the Russian scenario, the country is against homosexuality though the Olympic Games was used to encourage the country to embrace cultural diversity, even though, the Russian society has a strong disliking for such personal views and orientation. Positive aspect of Sports Diplomacy The United States has always embraced sports diplomacy as an important vehicle for strengthening relations with other nations. The implication is that the country has been able to use the universal appeal of sports as a passionate event to go beyond the socio-cultural and linguistic differences and bring many people together (Grix & Houlihan, 2014). The USA is a diverse nation in terms of culture; thus the nation relies on sports to improve intercultural communication. For instance, the X-Games are unique to the American soil since the winter games have many enthusiasts thus has been crucial in improving the nation’s social capital by embracing tolerance through effective intercultural communication (Thorpe & Wheaton, 2011). In effect, sports have the potential for teaching people communication skills, especially in the intercultural contexts. In this regard, sport in the USA exposes the foreigners to American culture thus providing or establishing links with peers. Morever, the establishment of links with people from different culture implies that the individuals have been successful in mastering the essentials of intercultural communication. In 1998 for instance, the FIFA World Cup held in France was marked by the first victory by the Iranian team and interestingly, it was held after the Iranian revolution where the two countries had serious political friction (Deyo, 2013). After the match, the two teams embraced each other with gifts and smiles despite the political tensions thus indicating how sports have a positive influence on intercultural communication. The negative influence of sports on social structure Despite the positive role that sports play in the society, history holds that sports was one of the primary tools used to influence local culture during the colonial periods. For instance, the apartheid regime in South Africa was successful save to the integration of the western sporting culture in the socio-structure of the African nation (Allen, 2011). The South African example indicates how the language used in sports has both positive and negative implication on the social structure. During the apartheid regime, games were organized solely for the whites and the blacks were not allowed to participate (Wells, 2014). In such a scenario, the language used in sports was aimed at segregating the blacks, thus showing the negative aspect of intercultural communication. The implication is that sports language or terms used may bring or divide people together. In the South African scenario, sports was used to create a culture of loath towards the Africans where most of the nationals believed that only the Western social structure was superior to that of the Africans. The North Korea’s participation in the World Cup, 1966 led to the country’s first recording of victory as it defeated the much favoured Italian team (Ok & Park, 2014). In response, King Jung II boasted how sports could be used to strengthen a country's unity, promoting ideological beliefs and increasing international reputation. From the example, the North Korean government used sports to build a good name for itself though the country has never lived up to such expectations thus highlighting how sports can be used to send a wrong message during intercultural communication. Using sports to improve intercultural communication One of the characteristics of intercultural communication is that people tend to use common terms that are only understood within the particular context of communication (Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2012). For instance, terms like a goal, thrown in, free kick are some of the English terms used in football but are understood by various people from different cultures. In this case, sports has a positive influence on intercultural communication by defining common terms used the spectators irrespective of their cultural backgrounds. The implication is that sports language is inclusive in nature because when people understand the terms being used, they are connected (Butterworth, 2013). In this regard, sports events are a useful vehicle for teaching people how to embrace sound intercultural communication. Another important aspect of sports is that the nickname given to the teams also has an exclusive impact to people who do not follow the events. Therefore, sports improve not only the intercultural communication skills of those follow the events but also individuals who do not follow the events. The exclusive influence of sports is because sports become a culture that teaches people how to tolerate and embrace one another by bringing a common language for communication. Both the negative and positive aspects of sporting events show that intercultural communication is defined in different cultural contexts, and this depends on how culture is defined in a given situation. Culture can be defined in terms of language, a country group, regional group, religious group and so on (Guo et al., 2015). On the other hand, different sports have unique cultures thus when people engage in communication in such situations, they are taking part in intercultural communication. Since politics is part of culture, sportsmen have on certain occasions used sports as a culture to influence the politics in both national and sub-national levels. The success of athletes is a clear indication that sports is a positive implication on intercultural communication by bringing in new people into the political arena that has been dominated by the much-celebrated politicians in the society. Conclusion In summary, sports diplomacy has been crucial in influencing political as well as social relations. Sporting events have become platforms for airing political ideologies and has also been crucial in increasing the interactions between people from different ethnic, religious, and racial groups. The South African case is a classical example of how sports can change the social structure or a society while the easing of tensions between Iran and USA in 1998 FIFA World Cup shows how politics can have positive implications. All in all, all the impacts of sports in a society depend on the nature of intercultural communication. The implication is that sporting events lead to the creation of common languages that people identify with thus building good relationships among the spectators. Bibliography Allen, D 2011, ‘The race for supremacy’: the politics of ‘white’sport in South Africa, 1870–1910’, Sport in Society, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 741-753. Baraldi, C 2015, ‘Intercultural Communication Systems and Discourses of Cultural Identity’, Applied Linguistics Review, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 49-71. Butterworth, ML 2013, The passion of the Tebow: sports media and heroic language in the tragic frame’, Critical Studies in Media Communication, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 17-33. Deyo, JM 2013, Sports and International Relations: The Role of Soccer in International Conflicts and Resolutions, Sage Publishers. Grix, J., & Houlihan, B 2014, ‘Sports Mega‐Events as Part of a Nation's Soft Power Strategy: The Cases of Germany (2006) and the UK (2012)’, The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 572-596. Guo, R et al., 2015, Culture and Sports. In Multicultural China (pp. 343-348), Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Hu, Y & Fan, W 2011, ‘An exploratory study on intercultural communication research contents and methods: A survey based on the international and domestic journal papers published from 2001 to 2005’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 554-566. Lee, SP, Cornwell, TB, & Babiak, K 2013, ‘Developing an instrument to measure the social impact of sport: Social capital, collective identities, health literacy, well-being and human capital’, Journal of Sport Management, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 24-42. Murray, S 2012, ‘The two halves of sports-diplomacy’, Diplomacy & Statecraft, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 576-592. Murray, S 2013, ‘Moving beyond the Ping-Pong table: sports diplomacy in the modern diplomatic environment’, PD Magazine, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 11-16. Ok, G & Park, K 2014, ‘Cultural Evolution and Ideology in Korean Soccer: Sport and Nationalism’, The International Journal of the History of Sport, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 363-375. Persson, E, & Petersson, B 2014, ‘Political mythmaking and the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi: Olympism and the Russian great power myth’ East European Politics, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 192-209. Thorpe, H, & Wheaton, B 2011, ‘Generation X Games’, action sports and the Olympic Movement: understanding the cultural politics of incorporation’, Sociology, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 830-847. Ting-Toomey, S & Chung, LC 2012, Understanding intercultural communication, New York: Oxford University Press. Wells, JC 2014, ‘In the Shadow of the Butcher: The Limits to Remembering in Post-Apartheid South Africa’, The Public Historian, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 51-74. Read More