�Թ���

Professional sports have always attracted a certain kind of fan for whom the game is an escape from politics and the news of the day.

That fan probably did not have a great Olympics.

Whether it was Kash Patel and Donald Trump inserting themselves into the aftermath of Jack Hughes’ golden goal for the U.S. men’s hockey team, or Ukrainian skeleton pilot Vladyslav Heraskevych being disqualified for a helmet paying tribute to fellow athletes killed during his country’s invasion by Russia, politics was like an icy layer just beneath the snow at the Milan Cortina Games.

“I think people are paying attention to it more because of the contemporary American political moment, but politics has always been an element of sport,” said Ever Figueroa, an assistant professor of journalism at the College of Communication, Media, Design and Information. “And the Olympics, in particular, have always been a platform for that.”

Figueroa studies how race and gender matter within social and cultural systems, especially the political undertone running through sports. He mentioned 1968, which featured the Black Power salute from Tommie Smith and John Carlos, and the 1980 Miracle on Ice as Olympic moments with strong political subtext that made the events memorable and interesting.

“All forms of art are more interesting when they have something to say,” Figueroa said. “Sports are able to communicate cultural values and reflect back on people. And a lot of people care more about the storylines within sports than maybe the actual competition.

‘Kind of boring’

“It’s kind of boring to want to separate sports and politics. It’s far more interesting when they’re together, and we can unpack all the nuances we see.”

That’s a perspective that comes up with some frequency in the courses he teaches, especially Sports, Media and Society, where students will ask about the cultural issues that play out in sport, especially when it comes to how they’re covered by the media. Figueroa asks students to study, for example, the rivalry between the Lakers and Celtics that dominated the NBA in the 1980s, as well as how the Kansas City Chiefs have gone from hero to villain amid the team’s success.

“In Lakers-Celtics, you had a team from LA and a team from Boston, playing two styles that were different from each other. So, it was not just two teams competing against each other, it was two ideas of America competing against each other,” he said. “I think that greater cultural reflection was what brought so many people to the television set to watch them.”

The Chiefs, meanwhile, are a villain story like any other—they’re so good that the league and officials must be rigging the game to help them win. And despite this one being debunked, “I told my class that sports cultivate myths,” Figueroa said. “Myths are more powerful if they feel real—they don’t need to have been drawn from reality or truth.”

Heroic values, but a villain

Ever Figueroa

What about when the game is scripted? One of Figueroa’s research interests is pro wrestling, which offers a nuanced, complex assessment of societal and political issues in its character development. A examined World Wrestling Entertainment performer Daniel Bryan, who was the league’s champion from November 2018 through the following April.

Bryan’s character, Figueroa said, was that of an eco-friendly environmentalist who railed against greed, consumerism, capitalism, climate change and animal cruelty—which would seem to make him a champion of a lot of values gaining traction in the United States. But, in fact, he plays a heel—wrestling parlance for an antagonist.

“The reason he worked as a villain is because he violates neoliberal meritocracy. He cheats to win the title and to retain the belt,” Figueroa said. “His character espouses these progressive values, but he’s violating the rules of competition. So it becomes bad to be anti-capitalist, or an environmentalist, because it’s attached to his actions as a wrestler who cheats.”

The paper also looked at the case of Kofi Kingston, a Black wrestler who succeeded Bryan as champion. Both Bryan and then-chairman and CEO Vince McMahon said Kingston was a B-level wrestler “who failed to take the opportunities given to him by WWE’s free market—a common tactic used to discriminate against people of color,” Figueroa said.

“One of the big concepts in our paper was this idea of using neoliberalism and colorblind ideology in tandem to gaslight a Black man who had legitimate grievances that he was being discriminated against because of his race, in order to not make that political subtext visible to the audience.”

Pro wrestling, Figueroa said, is understudied by researchers, which may help explain why certain tropes around the sport—like having a rabidly right-leaning fanbase or repeating the same formulaic story arcs—have persisted. In fact, fans of a competing wrestling promotion, All Elite Wrestling, started the anti-ICE chants that have become viral moments at its recent matches. AEW storylines also touch on progressive themes that eschew toxic masculinity.

“For decades, WWE has been really effectively appropriating contemporary political moments,” Figueroa said. “I use wrestling as an example to show how political sports really are—the narratives, the construction of heroes and villains, and so on. Those are all things we respond to as a culture and society.”

Joe Arney covers research and general news for the college.