Shadowed by the corpse of war: Sport spectacles and the spirit of terrorism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the early 2000s, there has been a groundswell of research on terrorism and sports mega-events, including investigations into the impact of ‘9/11’ on fear and risk management strategies at high profile sports events. In this article, we re-examine the case of the Salt Lake City Winter Games of 2002 around Baudrillard’s (1995) concept of the ‘non-event’. We compare the (largely British and North American) mass mediation and discursive framing of terrorism at the 2002 Games with subsequent discourses interwoven into accounts of terrorism, fear and security at the 2004 Summer Olympic Games in Athens and the 2006 Winter Olympic Games in Turin. Of principal interest is the global framing of sports mega-events as targets of terrorism and the ways in which such events become fabricated zones of risk. To understand why there is a lingering media construction of the sports mega-event as an imagined target (and, in many ways, pre-constructed victim) of terrorism, we draw centrally on Baudrillard’s work (1995, 2001, 2002a, 2002b). Specifically, we employ Baudrillard’s concepts of the hyperreal and the non-event as a means of exploring terrorism’s relationship with sport, and the potential usage of such theoretical ideas in the sociology of sport and physical culture more broadly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".