Sports & politics : Legacy, rights, and labour within the soft power mechanisms of the United Bid 2026
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2022 World Cup, a major opportunity for Qatar to enhance its soft power, had recently concluded with a victory that was as heavily contested as it was celebrated, namely the crowning of Argentina as world champions. Argentina’s win comes as a culmination for over a decade of continuous debates on critical topics that disempowered Qatar on the global stage, such as the exploitation of labor during the preparation for the 2022 WC which led to thousands of deaths of migrant workers, or the briberies offered by the Qatari government in order to influence the votes for the hosting rights. Nevertheless, the Qatari World Cup is concluded as a major success in terms of audience numbers and revenue produced. Given the controversy that has surrounded this edition of the World Cup, it will be interesting to see how the soft power mechanisms behind the 2026 FIFA World Cup (United 2026), a truly unique bid, has been constructed so far by the three hosting countries, Mexico, Canada, and the U.S., with regard to what John Horne concerns as the three main sites of political contestation of contemporary Major Sports Events, namely rights, legacy, and labour. This thesis will analyze the enactment of soft power through the preparations and promises made by the North American nations for the 2026 World Cup, with particular focus on the three aforementioned grounds. More importantly, besides exploring how soft power can be enhanced, the aim of this thesis is to reveal the ways in which soft disempowerment is already in sight for the host nations prior to the 2026 World Cup based on the severity of contemporary issues related to legacy, rights, and labour. Horne’s three sites of political contestation and significant theoretical provisions on soft power and soft disempowerment will be used in reaching the proposed aim of this work. Methodologically speaking, document analysis was chosen for the interpretation and selection of both primary and secondary resources of this work that takes the form of a single-case study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".