It would seem that we are living our lives presently amidst a media frenzy. Advertising and advertising revenue appear to be both the drivers and the benefactors of this modern day circus. Everything remotely popular from celebrity scandals to indoor bowling to natural disasters have been blown up and window-dressed to fuel this media facade, that is everything it seems except chess.
I among many others do not like what the advertising industry is doing but if chess is to become a more popular spectator sport then the chess world will have to take advantage of everything it offers in this realm.
And what does it have to offer ?
1. It is one of the most popular games in the world.
2. It is one of the oldest.
3. It is extremely cheap to play.
4. It is a perfect sport for todays interactive internet world.
5. It has a history of colorful players and characters.
6. With a good commentary, and lets be honest if the game is speeded up several times, it is very enjoyable to watch.
7 It fits in well in a population that likes to analyse and think.
Many people would like to dismiss the last point but if you look at the success of crossword puzzles, poker and bridge, and you see the success of the history channel, national geographic, pbs and the discovery channel, it is evident that besides being able to be totally enthralled with a good movie, people also regularly like something to stimulate their minds.
What this means for chess is that the game is missing out on a huge untapped market and opportunity to become more popular. Look how huge poker became both onscreen and off once it started being televised more regularly. As everybody knows if you want to make something more popular it has to be on TV.
If you look at the FIDE website and compare it those of FIFA or the NBA you can see that it is basically drab and boring and lacking imagination. Unfortunately this is reflective of how world championship level chess has presented itself since the Fischer - Spassky match, with a couple of exceptions.
Strange to think that the future of the world's oldest and most popular games has been put in the hands of people with little or no imagination.
The present powers in the chess world are either not trying to get chess properly televised or are not being successful. In some countries we are lucky if we see the moves of a world championship game printed in a newspaper. They need to hire executives from other sports who have already been successful in this venture. Why re-invent the wheel. Once media executives are properly shown how popular chess could be as a spectator sport, there should be no stopping chess getting a lot more media coverage provided they are allowed to use their media skills and not told how everything should be done by those who know a lot about chess and obviously nothing about publicity.
If the above path is taken then perhaps in a few years chess will be as popular onscreen as off.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Hi Chessboozer, Chess needs an intellectual society and this we do not have.
It might be better if the Chess players the world over gathered in the Desert and created their own city where the sport is chess and chess alone.
Hi Eric,
Society overall is not very intellectual but there are enough intellectuals within our society to justify more chess coverage.
Over the next few weeks we will be swamped with coverage of many different sports from China, some worthy of their coverage, but many with a fan base much smaller than chess has, yet when the Chess Olympiad comes around again it wont even be mentioned on TV, never mind shown.
Hi Chessboozer, you're right about that and it is really sad that our society does not support it. They want spectator sports and chess just isn't that fun to watch--unless you're a chess player yourself.
I consider myself to be one of the few intellectuals you're talking about, but you have to consider that chess also has its share of misfits and eccentrics.
Randy Hough is a good example of the type. A decent enough chess player (2200) and director, but to hear him talk--well, all I can say is that that guy is basically an idiot and doesn't know it. Hough, Hanken and several other types are not leaders, but eccentrics steeped in their own odd behaviors. Chess would have to do better than that.
I guarantee you that the FIDE President is probably a similar character, save only that he has money and speaks a different tongue.
Chess is not a spectator sport because of how it is presented. If the highlights of world championship games were shown speeded up with lots of stories to go along with the various openings, who played them in the past etc, and other things which happened in their life it could become very much a spectator sport. The game would basically have to be diluted at first to give it entertainment value for the masses, and will probably always have to be diluted to some extent. However it would bring huge prize money into the game and make it a lot more popular.
Hi John, naturally I hope that you are closer to being correct about this than I am, but consider this: We chess players dress like bums! That's not going to cut it in today's world.
Chess needs sex appeal, the best intellectual sport needs a "GQ" fit. If we continue to look like bums, then no one is going to take us seriously. And let's face it, some of our top players couldn't dress themselves out of a paper bag! They look silly, top 50 players walking around like a bum or worse! And they want to be taken seriously?
Underneath '2000', I can maybe understand, you don't want to look like something out of "GQ" magazine with a 1300 rating, and be laughed off the board, but over '2000', why not? Not everyone reaches that level. Once I go over '2000', you won't find me wearing anything but a sport coat at the least!
Chess players have to step it up. If you look like a bum, no sponsor is going to throw money into the game. Why should they? If we do not take the game seriously, why should they?
That's at least part of the problem with the marketing aspect. We need to take a hard look at Golf and Tennis and get these idiots and eccentrics out of positions of control. They ultimately suck and undermine the efforts of those who have the ideas to get it going. In fact, these same low characters drive those people away.
Post a Comment