|
PUBLIC TV SPORTS VIEWING:
FANS ARE FINDING GOOD SEATS AT THE BAR
by
Susan Tyler Eastman
and
Arthur M. Land
Department of Telecommunications
Radio-TV Center
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
Phone: (812) 855-1700/332-2996
Fax: (812) 855-7955
Email: [log in to unmask]
With special credit to telecommunications students of Indiana University
whose observations and reports contributed greatly to this study.
Submitted to the Qualitative Studies Division
of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
March 20, 1995
ABSTRACT
PUBLIC TV SPORTS VIEWING:
FANS ARE FINDING GOOD SEATS AT THE BAR
This study explored public sports viewing in bars and restaurants by means of
210 hours of
observation and informal interviewing at six sites. Grounded qualitative
analysis
revealed four schema for contextualizing public sports viewing:
participation in a
membership community, opportunity for social interaction, access to
otherwise unobtainable
events, and diversionary activity. Situated between the at-home and the
stadium sports
experiences, public consumption of mediated sports combines the
benefits of the control
characterizing home television viewing and the sociability
characterizing the group
experience.
PUBLIC TV SPORTS VIEWING:
FANS ARE FINDING GOOD SEATS AT THE BAR
Diverse pleasures and fan behaviors have been identified in recent studies of
televised
sport spectatorship (Brummett & Duncan, 1990; Crabb & Goldstein,
1991; Gantz & Wenner,
1995; Real & Mechikoff, 1992; Eastman & Riggs, 1994). Scholars have
recognized that the
meanings ascribed to sports broadcasts are produced as much by the
viewers as by the
broadcasters (Grossberg, 1992). Modern sport has become, as Goldlust
(1987) states, "a
distinct collective cultural creation" (p. viii). From a
theoretical perspective, the
performance and thus the consumption of mediated sports are
dynamically problematic (
dialogic in M. M. Bakhtin's terminology, 1981). Viewers bring diverse
personal and public
histories of sports consumption and various degrees of fandom to their
experiences of
mediated sports, which interact with a given text. An important,
though often overlooked,
part of the negotiated cultural creation for the television viewer is the
specific
context or situation in which the viewing takes place. Moores (1993)
stressed the
situated or embedded nature of television viewing, referring in part to
the ways the c
ontext affects the meaning of an experience. As Real and Mechikoff
(1992) have pointed
out, more examination is needed of "the nature of the interpretive
community in which the
sports fan places himself or herself" (p. 324). Gantz and Wenner
(1995) showed that the
sports audience was "not a monolithic mass" and that the sports
experience was not
constant across viewers (p. 57). This study assumes that the context of
sports viewing
shares this diversity. It explores the contemporary dialogic of one
sports subculture -
the fan whose desired or acquired site of televised sport
consumption and cultural
production is a public place. What are the contextualizations of such
sports
spectatorship that draw these fans out of their homes and into the public
setting?
Public contexts for TV sports
In addressing the pleasures and attractions of sports spectatorship, Duncan and
Brummett
(1989) note that most studies have not differentiated among the
various kinds of
spectatorship (called
Public TV Sports Viewing
Public TV Sports Viewing
unwarranted totalization in Brummett & Duncan, 1990, p. 227). They censure
generalization
across all kinds of spectating even though significant differences exist among
and within
the experience of a game in the stadium, at home on television, or, they noted,
through
sports films and archives. Duncan and Brummett identified three
dimensions for the study
of televised sport spectating: the technology, the content or
discourse, and "the social
context and practice within which the technology and discourse
operate" (p. 196). Their
study concluded that "more in-depth work in the area of television
sport spectating is
needed, particularly studies of actual social practices during
television spectating"
(p.208). It follows then, that viewers' social practices may be quite
different depending
on where the television spectating takes place -- in the privacy of one's home,
in the
public setting of a sports bar, on a giant arena screen, or amid the
noise and
distractions of a mall display, in airports, a public hallway, and the like.
Addressing part of this need, Eastman and Riggs (1994) explored the social
context of the
home, showing how fans watching televised sports negotiated and reinforced
their desired
outcomes by habitualizing their experience in idiosyncratic rituals.
Ritualizing viewing
is one common means by which fans alter their experiences with
television to give the
programs more relevance to their lives, and it is distinct from other
forms of repetitive
fan behavior such as habit, traditions, and superstitions. Eastman
and Riggs situated
personal rituals in the contradictions between television's immediacy
and its mediation of
the event, and accounted for idiosyncratic rituals as ways of establishing and
reinforcing fans' group membership, creating fans' sense of connectedness to
the sporting
event, allowing fans fuller participation in the event despite the
electronic wall, giving
fans a sense of security in spite of the unknowable outcome of live events, and
sometimes, even influencing that event when the fan is, or purports to be,
superstitious.
Eastman and Riggs saw private ritual behavior as "manifested fervor about some
form of
social entrance" (p. 28), and MacAloon (1984) found the experience
of participation
central to the efficacy of rituals, and claimed that rituals affect
social
transformations; they don't merely accompany them.
Much has been written addressing the meaning of sports to society that explores
fan
motivations and provides accounts of public fan behavior while
attending spectator events.
Sloan (1979) identified six psychological functions that sports may serve for
fans: 1)
belonging needs filled by identification with a team; 2) diversion
from the routine; 3)
stimulation; 4) cathartic relief of tension and aggression; 5)
entertainment; and 6)
achievement vicariously felt through the accomplishments of their team.
Gantz and Wenner
(1995) ennumerate previewing and postviewing fan behaviors and more
than a dozen exposure
motivations. Duncan and Brummett (1989) unify the appeals of
televised sports at a
psychological level by looking at the commodified nature of athletics,
the live, unfolding
nature of televised sports, and the opportunity for viewers to identify
themselves with
the public personas of television stars.[1] Scholars such as
Guttman (1986), Real &
Mechikoff (1992), and Fiske (1992) have commented on the ritualistic
nature of sports
fandom, particularly in the stadium context, and the mythic functions
sports serves in
society. These studies identify parallels to the television fan's
desire to more actively
participate, to influence the outcome, and principally, to share a sense of
community or
membership in a group (Eastman & Riggs, 1994). It may be that the
consumption of sports
in public settings such as bars and restaurants seeks to more
closely re-establish the
sense of extraordinary community that is found at the stadium event
than can occur in most
home settings. Gantz and Wenner (1995) found "the exposure experience more
tempered at
home than at a stadium" (p. 70), implying that television mediation
might limit fan
participation. On the other hand, there is the intriguing phenomenon of
tens of thousands
of fans of New York Rangers hockey, Atlanta Braves baseball, and numerous
college
basketball teams gathering in home stadiums to watch away playoff games
on the large
monitors, cheering and jeering as though the games were actually being
played before them.
Since these events are available in their homes on broadcast television, the
phenomenon
supports Bragg's (1994) claim that fans desire cohesion, but it also
suggests to these
researchers that mediation itself may not define sports fan activity.
Though not specific to sports program viewing, Lemish (1982) utilized Goffman's
(1971)
social rules framework for interpreting television viewing of all
kinds in public places
(hospitals, bars, lounges, department stores, etc.), concluding
that:
Viewing television in public places is not merely a phenomenon which consists of
an
aggregate of individuals viewers who have little in common
with each other. Rather,
it is an established phenomenon in American culture through which communication
rules, in general, and specific public viewing rules in
particular are created,
molded and practiced (p. 779).
From her observations, Lemish constructed four generalized rules of public
viewing: (1) a
public viewer of television adjusts to the setting; (2) a public viewer of
television
adjusts to other viewers, (3) a public viewer adjusts to the
television set; and (4) a
public viewer of television is open for television related social
interaction. These
rules might illuminate the particular nature of viewing televised
sports in public places.
What remains to be explored is how sports fans negotiate the site of
consumption, how the
setting mediates the fans' behavior and experience, and how their unique
collective
experience is produced. Gantz and Wenner (1995) pose a debatable
dichotomy between the
stadium and home viewing:
For many, in-person attendance at the sports arena is problematic; commutes and
ticket prices often are prohibitive. But, with sports programming saturating
the airwaves and with VCRs there for timeshifting purposes, viewership is as
easy as finding a moment's respite and a comfortable chair facing one's
television
set.
We propose that the "comfortable chair" need not be in the home. This study
builds upon
the earlier studies of sports television viewing behavior at home
and extrapolations of
general public viewing "rules" by considering the ways in which
sports viewing in public
places creates an alternative meaning or relevance for the sports
fan. In other words,
how does the fan contextualize the viewing of sports television in a
public setting? What
does the public viewing experience offer that distinguishes it from viewing in
the home
or attendance at the stadium?
METHOD
Bars are one public context choice for sports fans that permit, even encourage,
a
mediated sports experience. According to press reports, there are about
4,000
establishments identified as sports bars nationwide (Mihoces, 1994). All
have access to
sports television, generally via satellite, as well as providing
food and drink. Sports
bars also provide a fluid group-viewing situation chosen by the
fans. The audience for
television is larger than is usual in homes, but the crowds at each
site are far smaller
than typically occur in arenas and stadiums. Sports bars were ideal
for this study
because: (a) most towns have many of them, (b) they are dedicated - to
some degree - to
attracting sports fans, the television viewers of interest to this
study, and, at the same
time (c) the participant observers could blend in among other fans while
preserving their
ability to record behaviors and conversations.
Undergraduate students enrolled in a senior-level sports and television class
at a large
mid-western university acted as participant observers in six sites
identifying themselves
through advertising as "sports bars." Organized into 34 observer
pairs and firmly
instructed not to drink alcoholic beverages,[2] the participant observers
were systematically
scheduled for observation sessions on evenings and weekend afternoons over a
four-week
period in spring 1994 (from January 17th to February 13th) and again
for two weeks in fall
1994 (from September 5th through the 18th).
Observers spent from 4 to 8 hours over the course of repeated visits to the
same site
during their assigned week (see Table 1), with periodic on-site
supervision by the
researchers. Typically, 5 student observer pairs went to each site three
times and re
mained an average of 2.3 hours each visit. This procedure provided
multiple observations
at each site from somewhat different perspectives at different times
of day and night and
both weekdays and weekends. Observers were instructed to bring
audiotape recorders and
take detailed notes of observed behavior and conversations they
participated in or
overheard. Prominent sports being programmed at these times included
NCAA basketball and
soccer, NBA basketball, NHL hockey, PGA golf, and NFL football.[3]
Detailed narrative reports for each visit, along with verbatim transcripts of
audio-taped
patron and/or staff interviews and conversational exchanges were prepared
immediately
following each observation period. Collectively, these reports
represent over 210
unduplicated hours of on-site observation. To supplement these
relatively naive
observations, a researcher conducted audio-taped, open-ended interviews
about sports
viewing with permanent staff at five of the six sites. These were
lengthy, informal i
nterviews lasting 1-2 hours, which generally took place during slower
afternoon periods.
These interviews provided a double-check on conclusions drawn from
the observations and
supplied supplementary information on control of the television,
sales and attendance
figures, policies regarding patron behavior, and staff accommodation
of fan requests.
Still further information on the distinct ambiance of each site was
obtained through
another round of site visits in the weeks following the interviews.
Training
For the student participant-observers, four class periods were specifically
devoted to
training in effective methods of participant observation, such as
role-playing the curious
novice in inquiries and suspending stereotypes while observating. Students
were
instructed to use open-ended questioning of patrons and staff to explore
beyond the
superficialities of bar decor, fans' team clothing, and alcohol-driven
cheering and
jeering; they were to look for the commonalities of setting, negotiated
viewer behavior,
comments and conversations that are revealing of motivations and
human needs, and then to
note exceptions to common practices. They were directed to closely
observe men and women
of all ages and not to concentrate their attention on other college
students. Training
aids included practice sessions directed by experienced guest
researchers, discussions of
and handouts on what to expect, daily reprises of goals and methods,
and ongoing class
interteractions over the course of the 6-week observation period.
Observation Sites
Six midwestern sports bars/restaurants were chosen as sites for observation
because they
identified themselves by name and/or decoration with sports viewing.
All locations were
equipped with large-screen television sets and satellite receivers
enabling them to offer
many sports program choices. The situating of sports viewing within
each establishment
was particularly interesting. Just as establishments that serve
both food and alcohol may
differ on their emphasis as bars or restaurants, so too are sports bars
distinguishable
by their varying accommodation of sports viewing in relation to
other available activities
and attractions. Mihoces (1994) notes that "sports bars typically are
decorated with the
stuff of sports, cluttered collections that make dusting difficult but set the
proper
tone" (p. C10), adding, "but which are `true' sports bar is a matter
of [patron] taste...
Some like vintage hangouts; others prefer trendier venues" (p. C1).
Food and drink played a major role in the activities at the sites, roles Gantza
and
Wenner (1995) have noted for sports viewing in general. Since all the
sites served food
of some kind (and thus were restaurants to varying degrees), it was
not uncommon for some
patrons to be interested only in their meals, especially during
quieter times when no
special sports programs were on TV. During these less busy periods,
every site becomes
more a restaurant and less a sports bar, and observers noted some
customers paid little or
no attention to the television during the course of their meals. For the
especially busy
nights of a home team game, however, some bars adapt themselves by streamlining
their
menus; as a waitress explained: "We get really busy on game nights,
so we have to limit
the menu to the more popular items because the kitchen doesn't have
as much time to
prepare, and we get behind really easy."
While all six sites in this study featured sports memorabilia prominently (with
an accent
on local teams) and tuned in sports programming almost exclusively on their
television
sets, the extent to which sports television and patron involvement
was accommodated varied
widely. At one extreme, televised sports served merely as an accessory to
dining; at the
other extreme, televised sports were the central attraction for patrons and
distinctively
identified that particular establishment.[4] Interviews, student reports, and
directed
discussion among observers revealed six factors influencing the
relative strength of an
establishment's emphasis on sports viewing in the perceptions of
patrons (at least in the
midwestern college town where this study took place): (1)
investment in sports reception
technology (multiple or wide-angle satellite receivers); (2) number
and size of television
screens; (3) physical layout of seating in relation to placement of television
sets; (4)
quantity and kinds of sports paraphernalia displayed; (5) management
policies regarding
program selection; and (6) day-to-day staff accommodation of
patron's sports viewing
activity. In seating capacity, the sites divide into a group of three
with more than 300
seats, two with around 200 seats, and one with fewer than 150 seats.
Brief descriptions
of the observed sites follow in ascending order of strength, from
sports viewing as mere
accessory to sports viewing as primary appeal.
Site A titles itself a "deli," although it is more readily viewed as a family
restaurant
serving alcoholic beverages with a meal. Located in the midst of a
large suburban
shopping area, the restaurant has four rooms of different sizes holding
324 patrons. In
the very large, high-ceilinged main dining room, there is no proper
bar. Local college
basketball items and national team sports paraphernalia are
abundantly on display on the
walls and over the service bar. But because the room is so large,
the items are generally
quite distant from patrons so they seem small and do not immediately capture
the eye. A
large screen TV set dominates one end of the central dining room,
and smaller TV sets are
suspended in all appropriate corners. There are three additional
small booth-lined rooms,
two with TV sets, one without, and only one of which has sports decorations.
Altogether,
there are only 9 television sets, including the large one. Though sports is
always
playing on the screens, management described the context as "more of a
sit-down restaurant
than a true sports bar. People mainly come here to eat; watching sports is
secondary."
However, on radio, this site advertises itself as a place "to come
watch the game."
Site B is located very close to the college campus and was referred to by
observers as
"your typical college bar." Built on two levels and holding 350
seats (the largest of the
sites by a few seats), the lower section includes three narrow two booth-lined
rooms and
a bar, with a total of 10 TV sets, one of which is a large
projection set. Upstairs are
two additional low-ceilinged rooms with a service bar and 5
additional TV sets, one of
which has a large screen. Autographed sports photographs, mostly of
local players and
team memorabilia, mostly from local teams, are scattered on walls
near tables. TV sets
are suspended in at least two corners of each room, with a
large-screen TV set serving the
larger rooms on both levels. The staff described Site B as "basically more of
a
late-night bar. Students come later at night, and it's packed on
weekends. There are
exceptions, but for the most part students don't usually come here
for sports." (The
implied message was that they come for drinking, and to a lesser
extent, eating.)
Site C is the smallest site. Located on the outskirts of the town proper in a
largely
working class area, it has a dance club below which attracts much of
the business on
weekend nights, and it has a sandlot for volleyball adjacent to the
building. Compared to
several other sites, only a small quantity of sports paraphernalia is evident;
several
area team football helmets are displayed, along with some team logos
and network banners,
but the rooms are too dark to reveal much else. The lounge area
consists of two open
rooms with a long bar, seating only 140 people. The bigger room
offers two large screen
TV sets with two additional sets placed above the bar. The
adjoining room has pool tables
and a video poker game, with one modest-size TV set suspended in a far corner.
A staff
member acknowledged a steady clientele of "regulars" who come by
after work for a drink.
There is also a small crowd of "sports fanatics" who regularly
attend on weekends and
occasional weekday evenings.
Like Site B, Site D is also close by campus and attracts a largely student
clientele.
Although it has one of the smaller seating capacities (only 197
seats), the interior is
dominated by far the largest projection TV in town (and 8 by 8 foot
screen holding a 6 by
8 foot projection picture). There are two levels of tables and
chairs forming a horseshoe
with the screen on the open end, allowing patrons both upstairs and downstairs
a view.
Six additional TV sets are suspended at strategic locations, some at
the bar. Beer
marketing and some local college sports team paraphernalia cover large
sections of the
walls. Site D is unique in that it offers an interactive trivia game
which patrons may
play by checking out a remote computer keypad. Any of the suspended
TV sets may be tuned
to a special trivia network channel which shows questions (many
sports related), answers,
and player scores. This site differs from Site B in that its
seating is directly focused
on the TV sets.
Site E is located nearest downtown and away from campus but still attracts many
students.
There are two principal rooms, holding 324 seats (placing this site in the
larger
group): one surrounds a central bar equipped with booths and tables
where there are 8 TV
sets; the second is a "game" room containing 10 TV sets and tables
and chairs as well as
six pool tables, arcade games, and other electronic games related to
sports activities or
testing sports-related skills (basketball shots, field goal
kicking). A large-screen TV
covers a corner of the game room and is visible from much of the
adjoining room as well.
Team sports and beer marketing paraphernalia decorate the walls of
each room. Unique to
this establishment is a sports message center readout suspended near
the bathroom
entrance. This device offers constantly updated sports score information.
Site E, while
unmistakably dedicated to a sport theme, offers many attractions
other than watching
televised sports.
Site F is located halfway between campus and downtown and attracts both
students and
businessmen. It has five separate rooms holding 212 seats in addition
to the main bar.
Year-round beer marketing paraphernalia, city softball league
trophies, and college team
logos keyed to the season are prominently displayed, although beer
signs dominate. In
addition to a covered outdoor atrium, there is a main bar and
adjoining room and three
rooms secluded towards the back. One back room includes pool tables,
but for the most
active sports viewing times (such as NFL Sundays), these are covered
and used as tables
for seating. Another small back room is dedicated on those days to
the local Cleveland
Browns fan club, and a large "Browns-backers" banner is displayed
facing the room's
entrance. What makes Site F unique is its abundance of televised sports
program choices,
with 2 large-screen projection sets and 16 other suspended TV sets.
Most of these are
hung in grouped rows of five, allowing bar patrons to watch five
games at a time. This
was the only site where the full slate of NFL games, college soccer,
and NHL hockey are
pulled off satellite (thanks to numerous receivers) and regularly
made available if
requested by patrons (and they nearly always are).[5] The owner
commented that "some people
are sports freaks, and they come here to watch four games at a
time."
Since all the sites catered to the general public, acceptable dress covered a
wide range
but was usually very casual. In the case of home team games,
college colors were certain
to be present in the form of t-shirts, sweatshirts, and caps; yet
they were not always
dominant. One hostess noted in an interview that she looks at team
clothing as a clue
about whether that person or group would prefer seats with a clear
view of a television
screen.
Data Analysis
Reports of observations and interview transcripts from all sites were analyzed
using the
constant comparative method of grounded theory development as
outlined by Glaser and
Strauss (1967). First, the raw data were separated into units
consisting of site
descriptions, narratives of patron activities, reprises of patron and
staff stories,
conversations and other comments, and interpretations provided by
observers, staff, or
patrons. Then, in successive stages, incidents/stories were compared
to locate emergent
categories; the properties of each category were coded and
recompared, and then outlyers
re-integrated wherever possible. Finally, descriptions, narratives,
raw comments, and
interpretive comments were reduced to their underlying uniformities
and condensed into
reasonable and serviceable explanations of the fan contextualizations
of sports viewing in
public settings. Prime exemplars of each contextualization were isolated to
incorporate
into this paper.
RESULTS
Several non-exclusionary schema best contextualized the activity of sports
viewing in
public places. Of these, four contextual categories illuminate the
role of context in
shaping the fan's experience by implying motives for seeking out a
public place such as a
bar rather than a stadium or a private place such as a home. One
additional aspect--that
of control over media--accentuates one further layer of context.
These schema operate at
different levels, and may reinforce each other and operate
simultaneously for some fans.
In this study, it was found that schema were subject to change over
the course of an event
as the perceived cultural importance of the sporting event influenced the fans'
level of
involvement.
Community Participation as Membership
As has been widely recognized by media scholars, group viewing is closer to the
experience of actually attending a sporting event and gives the fan a
greater sense of
connectedness and membership in a group than watching in private.
Sloan, (1979), Gantz
(1981), Chandler (1988), Crabb and Goldstein (1991), Eastman and
Riggs (1994), and a host
of other scholars acknowledge the important role of sports in
establishing an individual's
sense of membership in a community. Fan clothing establishes the claim to
group
membership, but participation in viewing verifies that claim. Moreover,
membership
feelings are enhanced by watching sports with others, and the public
context supplies
moments of acknowledgement and acceptance by other fans. A
participant-observer pair from
Site C expressed the situation this way:
At one point in the game, (local player) drilled an important three point
basket.
Finally, the
lack of communications between tables had been broken. Each table cheered
loudly, and
approving glances were made toward one another. Then one man started talking
to the
entire
bar, saying `(He's) a first round draft choice for sure!' The members of all
four tables
started talking casually about the (home team) basketball star, and from that
point, the
mood
of the room changed immensely. There was an unofficial type of friendship
built, some
sort
of bond, that linked us together. Our cause was to see (home team) do well.
Fans distanced from their favorite teams also come looking for a sense of group
membership: "Look at this place, a great bar filled with Notre Dame fans.
This is what
life is all about." Another was unsuccessful searching for fellow
fans of his team: "I
came here because I figured there'd be other Bronco fans here who
[sic] I could chat with.
It makes watching the game more fun."
However, for some fans, the experience of watching sports in a public setting
goes beyond
acknowledging group membership; the dynamic nature of the public experience
helps the
viewer participate actively in a community which rewards the viewer
for fan behavior.
Stadium attendance may also accomplish this goal but is not an option
for hard-to-attend
events. A desire among televised sport viewers for approximating
the stadium experience
is noted by Eastman and Riggs (1994), who observed that, "Many fans
create [in their
homes] a stadium experience to heighten their participation in a game"
(p. 261). They
refer to the display of posters and pennants along with the
consumption of ritual foods
and drinks and associated activities. In a similar fashion, sports
bars become
stadium-like creations that have their own special rewards, including active
participation
in a community. As one young fan new to the sports bar scene enthusiastically
explained:
I heard that it was a lot of fun watching the games here. I just turned 21
two weeks
ago, and I figured that I should come out a see what it's like.
It's more exciting
watching it here. You have so many people here watching and
cheering, it just seems more
exciting. It's more like you're at the stadium, except here
you can get drunk without
getting hassled or in trouble.
One "regular" in our study found that he actually feels "at home" in the sports
bar: "The
people are serious sports fans like me. I feel right at home. I try to come
here every
Monday night in the fall to watch Monday Night Football with friends
of mine."
There seems to be an interaction between site and an event's uniqueness.
According to
many fans, games that hold the status of a "special event" for the
viewer are more
fittingly viewed in a public place. Watching a game in a public place
adds to the event's
meaning and importance. One observation echoed in all the site reports was
that the
greatest number of customers come to watch the home team games, even
though they are
available to watch on television at home or possibly even to attend in
person. These
games and the Super Bowl are widely acknowledged as special events,
and other televised
games do not draw in patrons nearly as well. One home team fan put
it bluntly, "If it's a
team I could care less about, what's the point of going out in public?"
Proximity to the television was a general indicator of involvement. For
special events,
groups arrived early specifically to get seats close to a particular
screen. Even during
periods of low activity when clear lines of sight to the screen were
not a problem,
solitary patrons or small groups would often seat themselves as close as
possible to the
TV set showing a game that interested them. One waitress advised
arriving plenty early on
home team game nights:
An hour and a half [early] will get you a good seat so you can see the TV. For
the
(arch-rival) game, you had better get here about two hours before.
It was really crowded
for that game, even though there was eight inches of snow on
the ground, and it was minus
32 degrees outside.
One home team fan claimed he watches in public whenever he can't attend in
person: "I
haven't missed a game whether I'm at Memorial Stadium or watching it
on TV for a long,
long time. So when I can't attend the game in person, I will go
somewhere to watch it on
TV. Here I am!" Other fans seem to prefer watching at home, noting
"when I'm at home, I
can be lazy on the couch a flip through the stations if things get
boring. Also, I can
have the TV set on while I'm doing other things around the house."
But he and others
confess, "if it's a big game, I might go out with some friends to
watch it."
When no special event is being viewed and/or patrons are few, collective
behavior was
seldom observed. One pair of participant observers put it this way:
The crowd this night was very small, and not much was going on in the
restaurant.
Everyone was engaged in their own conversation and ignoring the
television completely.
Only a few people dining by themselves acted as if they were
even interested in the t
elevision (Site D report).
Social Interaction as Unification
There is no question that the presence of sports television can serve as a tool
or medium
for social interaction on a personal level. It functions to provide a sense of
cooperation in a (superficially) competitive situation. Sports
conversation is widely
recognized as an especially acceptable ice-breaker, providing an
attractive topic for
interacting with total strangers. Crabb and Goldstein (1991) state:
Sports are frequently considered safe topics of conversation, particularly among
American
males. Introducing the topic into conversation produces, if
it does not already exist, a
`nonserious' or mock-serious tone to social interaction.
Within this nonthreatening
context, however, heated argument and debate may occur (p. 367).
Lemish's (1982) fourth rule of public viewing of television holds that viewers
are open to
discourse regarding the programming. In this study, one patron who expressed a
preference for watching games in public said: "This bar has a very
pleasant atmosphere.
It's good to get out of the house, you know. Instead of being home
alone, I can talk to
strangers like you about sports, which I have always enjoyed."
Another frequenter of one
sports bar acknowledged that simply watching sports may be better
accomplished at home
(clearer view of picture, better concentration through fewer
distractions and
interruptions), but the sports bar adds another layer to the experience:
I get less involved when I come to (Site B) because I'm more preoccupied with
the people
around me. I can always just (watch) at home, but I'd rather watch the game
with a bunch
of other people. If you really want to watch, stay home, but here it's a
social thing.
Events in the game being watched often stimulate conversations of the nature of:
"Oh,
ouch! That's exactly how I tore my back muscle playing football."
"You hurt your back?
I broke my arm..." As any fan recognizes, sports-inspired exchanges
often include
non-conversational expressions such as cheers and moans, or non-verbal
acts such as
high-fiving and drumming on tables. It must also be noted that the
exchange need not
always be positive, as frustrations with the game were as common as
positive reactions
within the public space. One observer-pair at Site C during the
Super Bowl encountered
this behavior:
When Thurman Thomas scored on a five yard touchdown burst, our table jumped up
in
celebration. Plenty of assorted boos were shouted toward the
television, and many more
sent our way. There was a growing feeling of resentment toward us,
and we heard comments
like `Shut up!' `What a bunch of losers.' And even: `We're going to kill
you,' I assume
talking about Buffalo (the offending team).
But on another level, interactions among public sports viewers unifies the
individuals,
creates a community and identifies the individuals with the
community, paradoxically both
because of and irrespective of their team partisanship. In the
words of two observers:
We were about to observe the people's reactions to the Colts being beaten by
the Tampa
Bay
Buccaneers. The comments we heard were all negative towards the Colts. We
heard someone
say, "The Colts' secondary is terrible." Another man replied, "It's not the
secondary;
they're
not getting any pressure on Erickson." And someone else said, "If Erickson can
pick the
Colts
apart, I'm going to hate to see what Marino and Kelly do to them." All these
comments
reassured us that the audience was full of football fans, due to their
knowledge of the
game,
but they were not Colts fans.
Betting is another social interaction noted numerous times as being inspired by
sports
viewing, one viewer pleading, "If my name is Herschel (as the
football player), will you
buy me a beer?" Another fan admitted, "Sometimes we bet on plays or
points, then drink if
we lose the bet." Others admitted to patronizing certain sites because they
can place
bets with resident (but illegal) bookies as they watch.
Members of the bar/restaurant staff recognized the "ice-breaking" role of
game-related
comments and used them to their commercial advantage: "When I see
two guys or a group of
guys watching a game, I usually use conversation relating to the
game to break the ice and
to establish a relaxed atmosphere." Presumably, this results in better tipping
as well
as more pleasant working conditions. Many waiters and waitresses
also noted that they use
the game being viewed to set the timing for "checking in" with patrons, who
feel they
only want to be approached when play is stopped or during commercial
breaks.
Some women found the atmosphere of the sports bar to be conducive to social
interaction
of a more directed sort: "I think this is a great way to meet guys!
The ratio of guys to
girls is really in my favor. Also, I heard that a lot of athletes hang out
here, so I
hope to meet some of them." One woman referred to it as "Ladies
Night Out. We come here,
drink a few beers, tell some funny stories, and maybe meet a few nice guys."
Another
woman added, "we're not intimidated because we are the only girls
here right now; the guys
are intimidated by us. They think we must know a lot about sports because we
are here,
but that's not the case at all." Such social characteristics of the
public context are
not commonly available in private viewing contexts and are
circumscribed by the
inflexibility of seating in stadium situations.
Moreover, Duncan and Brummett (1989) have suggested that social interactions
about sports
can "unify the myriad of glances into a spectacle" (p. 201), which may refer
most
directly to such megaevents as Super Bowls and Olympic opening
ceremonies, but which can
be applied to consumption and production of sports in a bar. It may
be that the very
dynamics of communal interactions among fans in a public place
generate a mini-spectacle.
Certainly, group viewing reinforces the specialness of many sporting occasions,
raising
them beyond the ordinary.
Unusual Access as Fan Legitimation
The function of insider discourse as a means of fan legitimation is widely
recognized,
and Fiske's "excessive reader" (1992, p. 46) has special status
among sports fans. Sports
knowledge can even twist gender roles, as we see in this interview:
Q: You seem to be the only girl interested in the game. Why is that?
A: I wouldn't say the only one because three of my friends are here too, and
they like
football. When it comes to knowledge though, I guess I know a lots more
than they
do.
Q: Why do you say that?
A: Because they like it because it's popular. I like it for the sport of it.
I grew up
going
to Giants games with my dad. I don't have any brothers, so I guess my dad
tried to
make
me his son a little bit. I know more than any girl you'll ever know. I
know all the
rules
and everything. I'll give you ten bucks if you can find another girl in
this bar that
knows
as much.
Q: Don't you find it hard to pay attention to the game when you're at a bar
with friends
who
don't care or understand as much as you?
A: At times. I really try to pay attention to the game, and sometimes it is a
little
distracting
with my friends asking me questions and being loud and stuff.
Q: Why not watch the game in private in your own room?
A: A few reasons. First of all, you can drink and eat during the game. There
are a lot
more
people to talk to at halftime, and if I can teach my friends something about
the game
in the
process, it makes me feel good. I think there needs to be more women sports
fans;
it's not
just a male thing.
Thus, for this fan, sports knowledge was not only inherently authenticating in a
way that
reached beyond her gender, but teaching about sports had further
legitmating and socially
rewarding functions.
The increased availability at public places (via satellite dish and/or cable)
of many
channels of televised sports programs provides patrons with greater
access to more and
different events than may be available in their homes. One
enthusiastic football fan
stated: "You can't beat Saturday or Sunday in here! No matter what
game is on, you can
see them all. It's great; they have every game on television
instead of sitting at home
and watching one game." Another baseball fan added: "I used to
come here on Sundays to
watch ESPN's coverage of the baseball game of the week. I live out
in the country and
can't get cable."
Some specific (usually NFL) team fans patronize sports bars to get around the
limited
choice of games available at their homes, even admitting they would
stay home to watch if
it were available there. One owner noted that bettors come to
access numerous games
occurring at the same time. A staff member noted that while most
viewers crowd the large
screens, "the seats at the bars are taken up by the many gamblers
who regularly bet on the
games. They can view as many as 5 different games at a time." During NFL
games, viewers
participating in "rotisserie leagues" (where winning or losing is based on the
performance of individual players on different teams) can also keep track of
more
information than would be available by watching any single game.
Three patrons put a different angle on the access provided by sports bars: "My
wife
won't let me watch a game at home 'cause she always wants me to do
something else. So I
just come here and watch what I want." Others noted the value to
them of access to
information not otherwise available: "I enjoy the fact that you can get
a lot of inside
stuff on (home team) players and teams. I heard about the Bailey
surgery months ago from
one of the guys here. If you keep your ears open, you can find out
a lot."
Since these games are commonly available on home television sets, one must ask
what the
viewer gets from seeking out games of a particular team,
hard-to-find televised games, or
nontypical sporting events. These behaviors appear to be means of
affirming the sports
viewers' status as real fans, of legitimating themselves as serious
fans. Not only does
knowledgeable discourse of sports talk validate a fan, but seeking
access to more
exclusive events enables a fan to claim special status as a serious sports
fan (and a
bettor).
Diversion as Entertainment and Modeling
For nonfans or the serendipitous viewer, watching sports in a public place
serves as an
attractive and acceptable diversion while waiting, eating, drinking,
talking, or engaging
in other activities (pool, darts, crossword puzzles, schoolwork).
Watching sports helps
to mark and pass the time. Lemish (1982) noted that watching
television often served
these purposes for those who found themselves engaged in other
activities in public with a
television set on nearby. Gantz (1981) and Gantz and Wenner (1995) list "to
pass time"
between more engaging pursuits as a stated use for watching sports
at home.
As already noted, some patrons came to the sites primarily for the food: "I
like to eat
here. It's a nice place. If there's a game on I'll watch it, but
that's really
secondary." Some came for the drink: "We just came to relax and have some
beer. The
game is a bonus." Others sought to mix dining and viewing: "My
girlfriend and I had
plans to go to dinner, and we figured that if we came here, we would
also be able to watch
the game." Still other patrons were unexpectedly held by the attraction of
televised
sports: "We just came here for something to eat, but the game
started before we left, so
here we still are."
Some sites mixed sports television with other entertainment attractions to
broaden
appeal: "There's a lot to like about this bar. First of all, I can
watch the game while
drinking and hanging out with friends. There are many cool video
games to play also.
This place is fun." For some sports television viewing helped to
sustain a level of
entertaining engagement: "This place is cool, because even when it
isn't crowded, it's
still kind of noisy and busy, and I can watch games at the same
time, if I get bored
playing pool."
Some patrons and staff noted the effects of drinking can turn sports viewing
from a focus
to a diversion. One patron initially claimed: "We are here for one reason and
one
reason only, to watch football!" But he later confessed: "Actually,
sometimes after the
third quarter and my third pitcher, it gets a little hard to pay
attention." Referring
to the social compatibility of sports viewing and drinking, one
astute waitress observed:
"I would say that most people who go out to bars go out to drink. I think it
just makes
them feel better to be able to say they're going out to watch a
game."
Finally, for some viewers, the public behaviors of sports fans can serve as
social
modeling. Learning how to become a fan, how to adopt the fan persona,
and how to
legitimate that role are probably internalized incrementally over time
through exposure an
d participatory trials. Observers reported that some international
students appeared to
be learning to be "midwestern home-teams fans." In one particular
example, some Pakistani
students revealed acquired knowledge legitimating their participation: "Why
isn't Bailey
penetrating more?" "Why is Henderson shooting from the perimeter?" "Where is
the
rebounding?" Inadvertant as well as selected exposure to sports fan
models in a public
context invites such social learning and behavior.
Rules, Rituals, and Control
The widely recognized personal need for control over one's environment surfaces
in the
rituals and rules of public places. One issue of interest is
control over the display on
the TV sets. As a rule, the bartender had set control at the
observed sites, and in
nearly all cases the programming was exclusively sports. The sole
exceptions were
infrequent appearances of CNN or CBS newscasts. There were two instances
where a remote
control of a particular TV set was given to a patron, but only when
very few (and
uninterested) other customers were present. Specific games could be
requested by the
patron through bartenders, on a first come/first served basis,
provided there was an
available monitor. When patrons were sparse, bartenders would
occasionally search the
available channels for the most enticing sporting event, either
awaiting a reaction from
nearby patrons or simply scanning for their own purposes. The
occasion of "special
events" such as home team games and the Super Bowl superseded individual
requests for
other events, and all monitors would be tuned to the same program for
the event's duration
(usually including pregame and postgame).
Certain distinctive rules and rituals of behavior call out to be briefly
illustrated
because they uniquely characterize bars as a kind of public place.
These may consists of
acts of offensive language or extreme behavior (throwing items,
jumping in front of
others). Only rarely in our observations were such behaviors outrightly
censured by other
groups or individuals. Instead, there was a continuing negotiation of proper
viewer
behavior that usually resulted in a quieting or diminishment of the
offensive practice,
similar to instances Lemish (1982) noted in her study. On rare
occasions, those not
appreciative of the reigning social atmosphere left the bar: "Most
people were not
concerned with the (broadcasters') commentary on the game. However, one
table was annoyed
by the fact and left after the first intermission," noted one observation
report. The
majority implicitly exercised control over minority groups by means
of domination, as
observer reports indicated:
As the (home team) game got closer to game time, the noise level in the bar grew
increasingly louder. Then the clock showed 7:30 p.m. The music
system was shut off and
all the TVs were tuned to ESPN's broadcast of the game. At
this moment the crowd began to
holler, whistle, and clap as the screen showed the players warming up (Site D
report).
Another report brought out typical fan behavior:
People were yelling, cursing, slamming the table, and drinking. With all the
noise and
talking, it was really loud. No one was concerned about being
too loud or obnoxious. It
was hard to hear the TV, and one guy said to the waiter
passing by, "Hey, can you turn it
up more?" One viewer (not part of the larger group)
complained about the room being too
loud and crowded and said, "I should've stayed home. I can't
even hear" (Site F report).
The increasing sound volume associated with highly vocal viewers of questionable
sobriety
seems to be an accepted part of the sports bar scene. Arriving and
sitting with a group
seemed to heighten the viewers' overt expressions of arousal.
Observers consistently
commented: "People who were in groups had no inhibitions toward
expressing themselves.
It was obvious that they were comfortable with their friends and
were not self-conscious
about being noisy."
Other observers discovered that some groups of fans raised the game meal to the
level of
ritualized behavior advanced by Eastman and Riggs (1994):
Sean and Tad made it clear that they watch every game (the ones they don't have
tickets
for) at (Site B). They show up early to sit at the same
table, order the same food, and
get two
pitchers of the same beer prior to each game. Even more impressive was the
fact that
they
could point out other people in the bar who did the same thing.
There were also frequent observations of drinking games associated with a
particular bar,
game result, or player, as one waitress noted:
These girls said, `If we win by 15 points, we are doing a shot.' Well, we were
winning by
15 points, and they did the shot. And then they said, `If we win by 20 points,
we'll do
(another) shot.' Thank God we didn't win by 20 points.
They'll do things like that.
Some people will drink when (local player) scores. Everyone
will have their own drinking
game (Site B report).
Other games involving drinking were common among the younger viewers, but no
such games
involving food were observed. Interviews with staff indicated that
patron drinking tended
to increase with especially positive or negative game results - in other words,
tight
games led to less drinking as fans remained more involved with the
activity of watching.
These ritual activities may be necessary to create a sense of unity among
disparate,
unacquainted, and even competing viewers. As Levi-Strauss (1966)
noted, competitive games
operate disjunctively: They separate audiences into "winners" and "losers." At
the same
time, commonly identified rituals of clothing and behavior have a
unifying impact; they
operate conjunctively to connect individual audience members. Real
(1989) applies the
conjunctive and disjunctive concepts to stadium behaviors, but their
workings are even
more evident in the physically closer environs of bars and
restaurants.
CONCLUSIONS
That television sports viewing has become an essential concommitant of eating
and
drinking in many establishments, especially in college towns, is readily
demonstrated by
extent of the owners' investments in satellite dishes, large screen
projection sets, and
multiple TV sets place prominently and tuned to sports programs.
However superficially
alike, different establishments go to varying lengths to attract and
cater to public
sports viewers, and their viewers can uniquely contextualize their
sports experience. As
Duncan and Brummett (1989) concluded, the technology and discourse
of sports define the
social context of these public places. This analysis suggests that
the fact of mediation
is not as important as the context of consumption.
Observations of bar sports viewing in this study generally fell in line with
earlier
studies of sports spectatorship (Sloan, 1979; Real & Metchikoff,
1992), sports viewing at
home (Eastman & Riggs, 1994), and public viewing of television
(Lemish, 1982), but
situated the mediated public experience between that of stadium witness
and home viewer,
partaking of both but contributing unique enhancements and mesh of
characteristics. Some
social practices of public sports viewing created a stadium-like
context: the presence of
other fans of the same team; an overwhelming sports presence arising from big
TV sets
viewable from almost any angle and colorful sports paraphernalia used
as wall decoration;
an abundance of fan clothing on patrons; and a widespread
sanctioning of arousal in public
cloaked as fan behavior. These aspects of bars permit the unification of
strangers
within a public social context. On the other hand, other aspects of
the public social
practice seemed to reflect the home sports viewing experience:
mediated consumption of a
professionally-produced product; selective viewing among many
competing media options;
ritualized private fan behaviors; and the ability to easily move in
and out of the viewing
experience in an environment of friends and family (or, occasionally, alone).
The
home-like aspects of public viewing contribute to personal control and
such social
practices as escape and relaxation. Moreover, all experiences were much
enhanced for the
committed sports fan when the games had acknowledged cultural
importance and were
diminished to the degree that the televised events lacked distinctiveness.
Recreating the
stadium experience with the convenience and control of the home in the public
context
seemed to combine, for many fans, the best of both worlds.
On the theoretical level, this study adds to scholars' understanding of public
viewer
and sports fan behavior by distinguishing classes of behavior too
often totalized (the
"unwarranted totalization" of Brummett & Duncan, 1990, p. 227). The
results challenge the
conception of televised sports viewers as couch potatoes, and challenge the
idea of
television viewing as distinct from other, more elite, forms of
entertainment, such as
theater and concerts. Public sports viewing in this study demanded
the high activity and
investment levels commonly associated with live event audiences. It
showed proactive
engagement with the screen, which authenticated the sports fan, just
as knowledgeable
discourse and public celebration legitimate the fan.
Although observational research of sports viewing in a college town has limited
value for
generalization and cannot be advanced as a complete picture, it reveals the
multiple
layers of contextualized sports experiences and the need to avoid
totalization of the
sports activity. While fans in general (of Elvis, of Star Trek, of
romances) are
typically marginalized as deviants, Fiske (1992) held that sports fans are
usually
(perhaps because of sports' masculine appeal) to be viewed as mainstream
and not
denigrated within the dominant value system. As part of a mainstream
group, sports fans
have varying levels of engagement regarding sport, team, or
individual. In bars, sports
bar patrons (mostly male) legitimated their sport fan status through
their social
interaction; in contrast, some female patrons legitimated their social
interactions
through their fan status. For either sex, knowledge and behavior
genderized the fan. Of
particular interest were those sports fans seeking group membership
by actively
participating in the near-at-hand social communities that occur in bars, and
those for
whom sports conversation in a public context served as an acceptable
vehicle for personal
interaction with others, especially strangers. Thus, for many of
these fans, television
viewing in public serves special participatory and social needs not
met wholly either in
the home or stadium context.
Although MacAloon (1984) directs attention to the necessity of participation
for the
efficacy of rituals, in this study, rituals became the play of
participation. Unlike some
private ritualized behaviors described by Eastman and Riggs (1994), in bars the
rituals
of cheering, betting, public beer consumption, and the like were
treated with little
seriousness and not expected to have consequences for the game. Group
participation and
related social discourse became ends in themselves, disassociated
from the mediated event.
Understanding the contextualizations of television viewing has value to media
practitioners and producers because it illustrates the considerations that
make certain
televised events more suitable product for the fluid sports bar
context. For example, fo
rmal production accommodations should be made for the level of
distraction which affects
all publically consumed sports programming, and advertisers of bar
products should take
closer note of the character of point-of-purchase displays in terms
of distance from
patrons and television sets, and, one presumes, seek the ability to
attract attention
within the TV viewing context.
This understanding of the public sports viewing context also has importance for
media and
cultural scholars because sports fans often made great efforts to produce
viewing
experiences outside the traditional structures of consumption in ways
that better revealed
their inner needs. Although some sports viewers merely consumed the televised
event,
others actively constructed their sports experience to accentuate
social ends in private,
public, and stadium contexts.
Table 1. Hours of Observation and Numbers of Site Visits.
Establishment Hrs. Observed No. of Visits
Site A 33.75 17
Site B 39.75 16
Site C 35.0 17
Site D 42.0 18
Site E 20.0 11
Site F 39.5 16
____ __
TOTALS 210 95
REFERENCES
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In M. Holquist (Ed.) (C.
Emerson and
M.Holquist, Trans.), The Dialogic Imagination (pp. 259-422), Austin, TX:
University of
Texas Press.
Bragg, R. (1994, June 13). Stanley Cup of comfort: This year? New York
Times, p. B12.
Brummett, B., & Duncan, M. C. (1990). Theorizing without totalizing:
Specularity and
televised sports. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 76(3), 227-246.
Chandler, J. M. (1988). Television and national sport: The United States and
Britain.
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Crabb, P. B., & Goldstein, J. H. (1991). The social psychology of watching
sports: From
Ilium
to living room. In Bryant, J. & Zillman, D. (Eds.) Responding to the Screen:
Perception
and Reaction
Processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Duncan, M. C., & Brummett, B. (1989). Types and sources of spectating pleasure
in
televised
sports. Sociology of Sport Journal, 6, 195-211.
Eastman, S. T., & Riggs, K. E. (1994). Televised sports and ritual: Fan
experiences.
Sociology of Sport Journal, 11, 249-274.
Fiske, J. (1992). The cultural economy of fandom. In L. Lewis (Ed.), Adoring
audience:
Fan
culture and popular media (pp. 30-49). New York: Routledge.
Gantz, W. (1981). An exploration of viewing motives and behaviors associated
with
television
sports. Journal of Broadcasting, 25, 263-275.
Gantz, W., and Wenner, L. A. (1995). Fanship and the television sports
viewing
experience.
Sociology of Sport Journal, 12, 56-74.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory:
Strategies for
qualitative
research. Chicago: Aldine.
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public. New York: Basic Books.
Goldlust, J. (1987). Playing for keeps: Sport, the media and society.
Melbourne,
Australia:
Longman Cheshire.
Grossberg, L. (1992). Is there a fan in the house? The affective sensibility
of fandom.
In
L. Lewis (Ed.), Adoring audience: Fan culture and popular media (pp. 208-236).
New York:
Routledge.
Guttman, A. (1986). Sports spectators. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lemish, D. (1982). The rules of viewing television in public places. Journal
of
Broadcasting,
28(4), 757-781.
Lever, J., & Wheeler, S. (1993). Mass media and the experience of sport.
Communication
Research, 20(1), 125-143.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1966) The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Lipsyte, R. (1994, June 13). No matter what happens, let's stay together. New
York
Times,
B7.
Lister, V. (1994, September 20). Tuning into the right games essential for a
bar's
success.
USA Today, C10.
MacAloon, J. J. (1984). Olympic games and the theory of spectacle in modern
societies.
In
J. MacAloon (Ed.), Rite, drama and festival (pp. 241-280). Philadelphia:
Institute for
the Study of
Human Issues.
Mihoces, G. (1994, September 20). Sports bars serve up fun and fan fare. USA
Today, pp.
C1, C10, C11.
Moores, S. (1993). Interpreting audiences: The ethnography of media
consumption.
Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Murphy-Baran, T. (1994, July). NFL Sunday Ticket provides programming punch
for dish
owners. Pro Football Weekly, 9, p. 25.
Real, M. R. (1989). Ritual analysis: The global Olympic event. In M. Real
(Ed.), Super
media: A cultural studies approach (pp. 222-249). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Real, M. R., & Mechikoff, R. A. (1992). Deep fan: Mythic identification,
technology,
and
advertising in spectator sports. Sociology of Sport Journal, 9, 323-339.
Sloan, L. R. (1979). The function and impact of sports for fans: A review of
theory and
contemporary research. In J. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games and play: Social
and
psychological
viewpoints (pp. 219-262). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zillman, D., Bryant, J., & Sopolsky, B. (1979). The enjoyment of watching
sports
contests.
In J. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games and play: Social and psychological
viewpoints (pp.
297-337).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Endnotes
[1] Duncan and Brummett (1989) apply the psychological terms fetishism,
voyeurism, and
narcissism to their concepts of sports' appeals.
[2] The pairings were t
o ensure greater safety and to keep the research task salient; all
participants were ove
r 21 years of age.
[3] Industry consultant Mike O'Harro claims that NFL football, colleg
e basketball, and
college football are the only events that draw large mas
ses of people into sports bars,
but argues that other sports should also b
e available on television to attract both
specialty fans and casual viewin
g. He notes that "Sports becomes ambience: It's the only
thing you can watch on TV wit
hout sound" (Lister, 1994, p. C10).
[4] Sports bars generally specialize in their decor
, emphasizing memorabilia of some
particular team (Giants, Bears, the loca
l college team) or a sports theme (quarterbacks,
baseball, coaches, all-Mo
ntana--[both Joe and the State]), so that each bar in a city has
a disting
uishing characteristic (Mihoce, 1994).
[5] In the Spring of 1994, the NFL became "marke
ting partners" with sports bar owners
across the country by licensing them
to receive descrambled satellite transmissions of all
non-home NFL games. The fee char
ged for this privilege is based on fire code ratings and
begins at $399 for sports bars
seating 50 or fewer (Murphy-Baran, 1994). According to
the manager, Site
F paid slightly over $1800 for its license.
|
