How to ‘Use Your Olympian’: The Paradox of Athletic Authenticity and Commercialization in the Contemporary Olympic Games
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A paradox between commercialization and the authenticity of the Olympic Games has been identified in the established literature. We add to this discussion but with a specific emphasis on how this paradox is embodied by the athletes involved. We argue that the commercialization of the Games is inevitable in the contemporary media and corporate contexts, whereby the finances available from both are necessary to stage and promote the event. Within these contexts, we suggest it is also inevitable that Olympians become commodities that promote the brand of the Olympics. Representations of their heroism and their modelling of achievement culture provide an authentic credibility for the Games. Moreover, the Olympics add a distinctive dimension to this contemporary authenticity in their appeal to an ancient amateur heritage. We demonstrate, however, that amateurism is a creation of the modern Olympic Movement and is deployed to add another dimension to the general sporting authenticity that is currently invoked to manage the paradox of commercialization.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it