MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7093714640

A074: National Image, National Brand, and Heritage of Major Sports Events: Exploring the Development Path of Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics Heritage from the Perspective of Communication Studies

2024· article· W7093714640 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueScholarWorks (Boise State University) · 2024
Typearticle
Langue
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueArt History and Market Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBeijingCultural heritageResource (disambiguation)Cultural heritage managementPerspective (graphical)Industrial heritageNational heritage
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background/Purpose: The 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, with the concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind, were Olympic Games held in Beijing after 2008. Its Olympic heritage is more macro, comprehensive, and distinctive of China, and is an important resource for China's subsequent development. The cultural heritage of the Beijing Winter Olympics, as a world-renowned historical landmark, has a sustained endogenous driving force for the national image and brand building. Although there has been some research on Olympic heritage, it has mainly focused on the Summer Olympics, with relatively few studies on the heritage of the Winter Olympics. The current research on the heritage of the Winter Olympics has mainly discussed the definition and evaluation methods of heritage or analyzed individual categories of heritage such as venue preservation, with less exploration of heritage development strategies. In addition, although existing research has yielded certain results in the subsequent development of heritage from previous Winter Olympics (such as the Vancouver Winter Olympics), each Winter Olympics has its own specific environment and background, and its Olympic heritage also has its own unique characteristics. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a specialized analysis of the heritage of 2008 Beijing Winter Olympics. Based on the analysis of the characteristics of the Beijing Winter Olympics heritage, the purpose of this study was to explore issues such as how to utilize these features in the process of national branding, and ultimately what kind of national image should be formed. Methods/Design: A semi-structured interview was conducted to collect key experiences, opinions, and lessons learned from stakeholders in the construction of selected national brands and the Winter Olympics, to have a deeper understanding of the details of national image construction, national brand development, and the Beijing Winter Olympics and its heritage. Based on the list of stakeholder types mentioned in the literature, the criteria of the population most likely to answer research questions based on their first-hand experience, and expert knowledge of large-scale events, 12 subjects were selected to participate in this study, including members of the Organizing Committee for the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, partners and sponsors of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, important mainstream foreign media journalists, academic researchers from domestic and foreign universities in the impact of large-scale events and national brand research. Interviews were conducted from January to June 2022, covering the preparation, organization, and review of the Winter Olympics, providing interviewees with objective evaluation and reflection space. Due to the pandemic, the interviews were mainly conducted online through three apps: Skype, Zoom, and We Chat. The interview was digitally recorded and transcribed with the informed consent of the interviewees, and the interviewee's interview materials were encoded. The collection of data takes saturation as the node until no more information appears. Through constant comparison and inductive analysis, this study developed the relevant characteristics of the cultural heritage of this Winter Olympics and conducted discussions on this basis. Secondly, to make the text materials more detailed and abundant, online ethnography was used, relying on mainstream domestic and foreign online platforms, focusing on comments on the Winter Olympics cultural heritage and national image in the "online community", as part of the source of this research text. Results: The heritage of the Winter Olympics presented four important features that can be utilized in brand building: (1) consensus, resonance, and progress: a major country striving for world unity; (2) Green, environmentally friendly, and sustainable: the business card of the "Double Olympics City"; (3) People oriented and responsible big country: important achievements in the prevention and control of COVID-19 epidemic; (4) Kind, joyful, and youthful: Happy Winter Olympics and sports stars. These features were derived from China's early planning and have been successfully perceived internationally. The dissemination effect was good. Therefore, in subsequent development work, those features should be utilized as a focus and highlight. Conclusion: As an important connotation and clear goal of the cultural heritage of the Beijing Winter Olympics, the benefits of a national brand are considered a key achievement of the host country’s activities. This study specifically analyzed the unique features provided by the Beijing Winter Olympics that can create a national brand, and clarified the interrelationships between major sports events, the development of the host country's national brand, and image building work. Considering the long-term and important nature of national brand building, further research is needed to explore the specific media products and forms in which the characteristics of the Winter Olympics heritage can be applied, as well as how different media products should be coordinated.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,164
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,922

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,241
Écart entre enseignants0,207 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScholarWorks (Boise State University)Même sujetArt History and Market AnalysisTravaux en français237 207