Abstract
The commercialisation of sport has brought with it many benefits in the sense of
increase in money within the sporting context and wide coverage on media platforms
which ensure that sports can now be watched the world over. However there are some
who see only negatives with commercialising sport. They argue that sport brings with it
an instrumental value system that alters the ethics of sport into individual oriented
interests instead of caring to uphold morals of community. William J. Morgan
represents one among many of this contingent. His argument is that commercialisation
in sport alienates what sport essentially is supposed to be. This he sees as dangerous
since sport animates a considerable amount of people in society. Furthermore, he argue
that sport has potentialities to cultivate social identity which endeavours to create a
more intersubjective community. By commercialising sport, we are hindering what sport
could represent; the hope of freeing society from capital oriented value system.
This article is not written for the purpose of arguing against this thesis. This paper is
not meant to argue for commercialisation being beneficial for sport, that question it
leaves unanswered. This paper is dedicated to reviewing Morgan’s arguments for
claiming that commercialisation alienates sport. In order to understand the effects of
commercialisation, the arguments criticising it should be adequate in such a manner as
to be convincing. I argue that Morgan’s do not meet this requirement. This paper
explains how I come to this conclusion. In so doing, I also review other arguments
criticising sport, and attempt to illustrate whether they are adequate criticism against
commercialisation in sport. From my reckoning it is only critical theoretical arguments
which are the most convincing, since they critique sport acknowledging the role that
commerce plays in society and the sporting context. In this, critical theory doesn’t seek
to remove commercialising influences in societies, but merely remove the aspects of it
which lead to less autonomy of individuals in society. The other criticisms are
insufficient because they argue for the removal of commercialisation in sport. This...
M.A. (Philosophy)