The passage of a logic of monopoly
based on information with a logic of competition based on the distraction
developed the financial relations between the sport and television. With regard
to football, it should be recognized that the development of the world
structures of this sporting discipline, its effect over the continents and the
States which one could name international division of work allowed the
repercussion of an echo beyond waitings that this sport could generate.
Quickly, engagements of the States, through their national teams and their
clubs, in various competitions put them more and more in front of a line of
sight, namely, the desire pressing of the supporters and the fanatics tending
to look at or remote the matches on line that the protagonists deliver
themselves.
In these times, it is sure that public television covered
these events within the limits of its technological capacities. And the cover
of the sporting events was not paying. «The multiplication of the chains
in the Eighties, the appearance of a private sector, differentiation between
free nonencrypted hertzian televisions and general practitioners and diffusers
cabled, targeted and with toll reveal an obligation of result. From now on, the
function of programming consists in proposing the sporting emissions preferred
by the public at the hours when the potential audience is strongest.
This research will generate a fight between diffusers to
acquire the rights of retransmission of the events, source of inflation of the
costs. On the market of the sporting retransmissions are confronted a request
for acquisition of the rights of diffusion of the events by the chains and an
offer of these same rights by the sporting organizers (clubs, leagues, national
and international federations, CIO) » (Andreff, Nys and Bourg, 1987,
p. 11 and S.).
The latter develop strategies of sale of their products. The
private of the countries developed in general, and European chains in
particular, face a hard competition for the acquisition of the rights of the
retransmissions. And benefitting from the liberalization of the world markets
of the audio and televisual press, they realized of nature still unexploited by
the autochtones of the advantages which the spectacles of football in the rest
of the world offer.
This is why, strong of their technological superiority, in
Africa for example, these chains are practically the only ones to retransmit
the important sporting events which proceed on the continent. We quote to this
end, Champions' League African of football, of which the exclusive rights of
retransmission were always bought by French television International Canal
France (CFI). This chain, in its turn, reassigns some, realizing payment of
important money sums, the diffusion with the other public or private chains
national. In light, it is constant to note that current football was more
internationalized thanks to the similar movement of the rights of
retransmission.
Indeed, the deregulation of the market of the media of the
Eighties revealed a private sector of television. This sector was to be
essential at all costs, by exploiting advisedly the gaps or the negative side
of the public chains. It especially innovated with a new marketing based on the
proposal of a grid of capable programs to attract the most possible televiewers
to him. Thus, it had to be covered the emissions that the public would like so
much to see. In this direction, QUIRK and Al, (1999, pp. 28-29) let know that
«television collects its audience if it presents programs that public
wants to look at (and look at more than the programs which is presented to him
by other stations), before adding that there are few industries where
competition is more intense than industries of media and in particular
television. »
And televisions discovered in football this sport which
collects the most audience. Thus, «during the decade 1970-1980, football
occupied from 10 to 15% of the grids of programs, 21% of the sporting emissions
in 1996 with 518 hours, that is to say more than in 1959 with a score of
hours » (BOROUGH, 1998, p. 226).
