Views on Malarkey and Sports Corruption

Views on Malarkey and Sports Corruption

Introduction

Sports are under threat due to the increasing cases of corruption. Criminals are starting to identify the enormous profits that they can gain from sports by engaging in illegal activities. Apart from sports corruption, module one also provided insights on three types of sentiments, with the major one being malarkey. Malarkey is a popular statement, although it mostly goes unrecognized or ignored. Malarkey is a concept that is evident in sports discussions, especially in defining and discussing specific issues that may be impacting athletes or sports organization. Identifying malarkey in sports discussion is crucial as it helps to distinguish what information should be considered reliable and truthful.

Views on Malarkey and Sports Corruption

According to Frankfurt, the salient feature present in today’s cultures is malarkey. Although many people know this, they take it for granted as they have confidence in their ability to recognize it and avoid being taken in by it. The consequence of this ignorance is that people lack a clear understanding of what malarkey is, why it is so persistent, and the function that it serves. Malarkey is the act of talking nonsense or to bluff one’s way through something by talking nonsense. It is a concept that can be viewed closer to bluffing than telling a lie. According to Frankfurt, malarkey is more of conveying something false in a fake way. Therefore, malarkey is not false but somewhat phony that distinguishes it from a lie. It involves faking things, and it does not necessarily mean that getting things wrong as they may be partly true but incomplete. When people engage in malarkey, their focuses are usually panoramic rather than a particular meaning. They are constrained by the truths surrounding the point of intersection. Malarkey is more expansive, independent, and has more spacious opportunities for improvisation. As a result, malarkey is viewed as a greater enemy of the truth than lies. Additionally, the production of malarkey is majorly stimulated whenever a person’s obligations or opportunity to speak about some topics exceed his knowledge of the facts that are relevant to the concerned topic.

Sporting is a source of unity around that transcends differences in language, culture, and beliefs. However, the manipulation of sporting competitions by organized syndicates continued to threaten the integrity of sports. With large profits to be made and limited risks of detections, competition manipulation has continued to attract more criminals. Sports corruption is divided into competition and management corruption. Management corruption includes bribery and election manipulation, while competition corruption involves doping and match manipulation. Sports corruption involves both lying and malarkey. Doping, for example, is a corruption that involves lying about one’s abilities. It consists of using Performance Enhanced Drugs (PEDs) to boost one’s ability in sports. On the other hand, election manipulation is a corruption that involves malarkey, where faking is the primary strategy used. Sports corruption is, therefore, something that should be highly discouraged to protect the future of sports all over the world.

Example of Malarkey in Andrew Jennings

Andrew Jennings describes the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as an organization that owns the Olympics whose accounts are kept a secret. The statement by Jennings is a malarkey as there is little truth in it. It is meaningless talk that contains a lot of lies in it, which leads to the questioning of the author’s definition of IOC. Firstly, IOC publically publishes its financial statements, which is aimed at improving transparency. In publishing its financial statement, the organization describes the activities of IOC during the year and audited financial statements that include members’ indemnity.

Additionally, financial statements are prepared and audited according to the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as a way of ensuring transparency. It should also be noted that IOC has its external auditor known as PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), which has access to all its accounts for auditing purposes. Arguing that the financial accounts of IOC are kept a secret from the public and other external sources is a malarkey. As it is evident, in its efforts to promote transparency, IOC makes its accounts accessible to trusted external organizations and publically provided financial statements of its accounts. Arguing that IOC owns the Olympic can also be considered as a malarkey. The IOC is a non-profit organization that promotes Olympism around the world and leads the Olympic Movement. It is a catalyst for all the Olympic family members such as the National Olympic Committees, United Nations agencies, top partners and broadcasters, and Organizing Committees. The Olympics is, therefore, owned by a group of organizations and not only IOC. Arguing that IOC owns the Olympics is, therefore, a complete exaggeration and can be considered as a meaningless talk.

One reason that the author could have made such a statement is due to the lack of conducting solid research on the IOC. When authors fail to do enough research and rely on a single source for information, they are likely to miss out on crucial points. Authors need to access a variety of information if they are to gather enough information that they can use to support their definitions and arguments. Also, conducting solid research can ensure that the author effectively knows the topic under analysis and what is true or false based on the sources used. Another reason that might have led Jennings to make such a malarkey statement is biasness. Sometimes, authors let their perceptions and opinions on organizations control what they write or say regarding certain organizations. In most instances, biasness leads to false judgments due to the lack of enough supportive evidence but reliance on past experiences and information that confirms with one’s ideas. Bias leads to errors and providing information that is not credible. This can lead to meaningless information, which was evident in Jennings’ definition of IOC. These are some of the reasons why Jennings might have made the arguments he made in his definition of IOC.

Conclusion

Malarkey can be misleading to people who have little understanding of a sporting organization. In fact, it is considered more dangerous than lying due to its complexity and openness to creating opportunities. While sports corruption has significant consequences on sports, malarkey can mislead people who read or listen to sports information from whatever sources. The two issues, therefore, need to be taken seriously, and their root causes addressed for the sake of our future sports.