Other large discrepancies in coverage were that of the historic impact men’s and women’s olympic golds will have on athletics, the winning team’s nation, and its remembrance. When the Olympic gold’s were covered for the men’s Brazilian team and the men’s Nigerian team, the words “triumph”, “history”, and “victory” were frequently used. As seen here when discussing the Nigerian gold medal win, the author states “Nigeria made Olympic football history by becoming the first African and non-European and South American team to win the gold medal” and many felt it was “the greatest olympic match ever played” (“Olympic Football Tournaments 1996 – Men – Atlanta” 1996). Similarly, when considering the Brazilian gold medal win in 2016, the author states “For many Brazilians, the victory — in sporting terms, at least — made the Olympics worth hosting” (Ahmed, Leahy, and Pearson 2016). What both of these quotes exhibit is how these olympic wins for each nation have brought a sense of victory, history, and pride to their countries. However, when discussing how the U.S. women’s first olympic gold would have a historical impact, the emphasis of the gold was on something much different. Many of the articles focused on how this win really shifted gender norms and the idea of boundaries for women’s olympic sports. Rather than focusing on the pride and victory brought to the country, articles focused on how the U.S. gold was monumental for female athletes; Longman (1996) states that “the soccer team showed that, a generation after Title IX, women’s sports are here to stay” (Longman 1996). This quote really showed that the victory was not seen as a token to go and party in the streets or to bring national pride to the U.S., but was a staple for a shift in gender stereotypes in athletics. The difference here in coverage was very interesting.
Similarly, many articles for the men’s coverage discussed the celebration that occurred after these triumphant wins for the teams. More often than not, from the latent analysis, there were very different tones when discussing the parties and celebrations by a women’s team vs a men’s team. As seen here, Egbejule (2016) discussed the partying scene in Nigeria after the team took home gold by stating “all-night parties took over streets across the country, with bars running out of beer and leaving their generators on till dawn” and that people “were chatting and dancing and singing all night long after we left the pitch. We had done something that no other African team had done, so we couldn’t sleep.” (Egbejule 2016). From these quotes, one can see the how articles discussing the men’s victory and celebration take more of a party perspective, something most certainly not seen in the women’s articles. As seen here, Gildea (1996) discusses the women’s first ever olympic gold with a much gentler, more ladylike approach to a celebration by stating “The U.S. players closed out the most anticipated women’s soccer game ever by carrying and waving American flags as they circled the picture-perfect grass field in a victory celebration they would never forget” (Gildea 1996). The tone here is far more patriotic and gentle in comparison to men’s articles.
What can be concluded from these findings is that both the way in which men’s and women’s soccer was depicted in relation to its historical significance and the way in which the country, team, and fans celebrated was heavily gendered and incredibly divergent from one another.
