CHAMPION

Although the Paralympic Games has matured considerably since its inception, there is still discord regarding the inequality of the Paralympic Games and its athletes. One point of contention was that equal funding was not provided to Paralympic athletes in comparison to Olympic athletes. In 2003, the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) came under fire when Paralympic athletes Tony Iniguez, Scot Hollonbeck and Jacob Heilveil of the United States filed a lawsuit against the USOC, alleging that the USOC was underfunding American Paralympic athletes. Iniquez asserted that the USOC made healthcare benefits available to a smaller percentage of paralympians, provided lesser quarterly training stipends and remunerated smaller financial awards for medals won at the Paralympic Games. This placed the United States paralympians at a disadvantage as most nations such as Canada and Britain supported their Paralympics and Olympics athletes on near-equal terms.

The inequality towards the Paralympic Games was likewise illustrated in the media. While the Olympic Games experienced tremendous growth in global media coverage since the 1984 Summer Olympics, the Paralympic Games has been unable to garner such global media attention. The Paralympic Games first gained media coverage in 1976 where taped-delay television broadcasts were released. No significant changes were made in terms of international media exposure until the 2000 Summer Paralympics in Sydney. The 2000 Paralympics saw deals reached to broadcast the Games internationally, with Asian, South American and European broadcast companies distributing coverage to as many markets as possible. The 2000 Paralympic Games thus reached an estimated global audience of 300 million people. However, in spite of the advancements made in increasing global media attention, the Paralympic Games still faced challenges in maintaining media exposure.

In 2010, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) was castigated for its meagre coverage of the 2010 Winter Paralympics as compared to its coverage of the 2010 Winter Olympics. The BBC stated it would only stream some content of the Paralympics on its website and display a one-hour highlight programme after the Games. In comparison, the Winter Olympics received 160 hours of coverage. Similarly, American broadcaster NBC Sports, which owned the broadcast rights to the Olympics, was met with censure by athletes and International Paralympic Committee (IPC) officials for airing only a bare minimum of coverage from the Paralympics.

You may have read about Ms Cassandra Chiu and Esme her guide dog in the newspapers and over social media. The reports and postings highlighted that although Esme is a licensed guide dog, both Ms Chiu and Esme were denied access at several establishments in Singapore. This is despite the fact that we have laws in place that support the use of Guide Dogs in public spaces. We also have the Guide Dogs Association of the Blind (GDAB) that helps “the blind or visually impaired to enhance their quality of life through better mobility around their environment”. Given the incidences that happened to Ms Cassandra Chu and Esme, do you think Singapore is “disabled unfriendly” and Singaporeans less accommodating? Do you think that there is a lack of public awareness and education? To read about GDAB and the laws that protect the visually impaired, visit http://guidedogs.org.sg/.

Despite the disparity in the treatment between the Paralympics and Olympics athletes, the Paralympic Games bore a meaningful impact on society with Paralympics organisers claiming that the Paralympics has altered public perception of the disabled and that it has shattered the negative stereotypes of disabled people. In 2012, Lord Coe, Chairman of the British Olympic Association declared that he felt they have achieved their goal in creating awareness through “converting some of those extraordinary talents into household names”. Some fine examples are British Paralympics swimmer Ellie Simmonds, wheelchair racer David Weir and sprinter Jonnie Peacock, who have gained recognition and risen to prominence as epitomes of determination, courage and tenacity.

The change in public perception also brought about gradual changes in the welfare of the disabled committee, the most evident being the improved accessibility of facilities. During the 2008 Summer Paralympics in Beijing, China, Chief Executive Officer for the International Paralympic Committee, Xavier Gonzalez said that “In China, the [Paralympic] Games was really a transformation tool for changing attitudes across the board in China towards people with disability to building accessibility facilities in the city, to changing laws to allow people with a disability to be part of society.” Similarly, a 2010 study by the University of British Colombia (UBC) on the Olympic Games Impact (OGI) showed that an estimated 41-50 percent of 1,600 Canadian respondents believed that the 2010 Paralympic Games in Vancouver, Canada triggered increased accessibility of buildings, sidewalks and public spaces for disabled athletes and individuals. The survey also revealed that 23 percent of employers professed the Games had increased their willingness to hire people with disabilities. These changes, albeit minimal, signify a better future for disabled people.

Although inequality still exists and advancements have been piecemeal, the positive change display promise that the Paralympic Games has ignited the flames of change in attitudes and encourages society to view people with disabilities not as disabled but as capable contributors.