Sunday, July 15, 2012
Mark Rylance, BP & the Olympics
Platform London - Arts. Activism. Education. Research.: I thought about it. The conversation about private sponsorship being supported by tax payers money, and private sponsorship from companies that are not really necessarily behaving all that ethically, big questions about BP, and big questions about McDonalds and the amount of sugar and obesity that's costing the NHS billions – it's in the paper today. I think those questions are good and I had thought since agreeing that maybe I shouldn't be doing this, and if people feel critical of us who are taking part, I think they've got a point, a very good point. On the other hand, all these athletes, the human endeavour aspect of it is so wonderful, I wouldn't want it to stop, and I wouldn't want to be a nay-sayer or a chastiser.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The issue of private sponsorship is definitely a big one, and one that seems is becoming more and more relevant. In my opinion, Rylance took the best course of action of those he was given to choose from. The Olympics are meant to be a means of cooperation and collaboration (kind of) from different countries around the world, which ought not to be taken too lightly. While some of its sponsers have done things that are, shall we say, not so nice, a single-person boycott of the entire operation most likely would not have had much effect on the whole. I also agree with the author in that speaking plainly about the whole situation was the better thing to do. Rylance and everyone else all have, as the author wrote, every right to speak out on their opinions and hopefully will continue to.
Post a Comment