# data[].attributes.body
I think political ideology practiced in the United States to develop sports industry will be neo-liberalism. This is due to them believing that society is at its most healthy when people can run their daily lives without the involvement of the State. This ideology also states that people should freely choose how they organize their social lives and business as they see fit. Additionally, it sees little value and argues that the privatization of government services produces greater efficiency and higher quality outcomes. With that, it should be valued as an important social institution but not strictly controlled. It used as a staple for nation building and economic development and supported in these instances which focuses on elite sport at the expense of community sport.

Additionally, I think it is neo-liberalism as well due to the market dominance and limited government role. Market dominance as it states its market forces driving success in professional leagues which aligns with neo-liberalism focus on minimal government intervention in the economy. Limited government role is uses commercially derived funds for development which reflects a preference for private sector solutions over large-scale government programs.

# data[].attributes.body
Efficiency in Professional Leagues

Market forces can drive efficiency in professional leagues.

Teams cater to fan preference and generate revenue will lead to becoming successful.

Innovation

In areas like marketing, broadcasting

Focus solely on elite athletes

Focus on development of elite athletes at highest international level

Disadvantages

Financial support

Limited resources

Accessibility & Equity

# data[].attributes.body
According to the USOC's description, the political ideology promotes private ownership, deregulation, and a free-market system for governing industries, including sports, with a focus on minimal state intrusion in economic issues. Being owned by a private company implies that it is intimately related to the sport and is viewed as a private activity that emerges from the community and is run by volunteers. Under the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, which confers commercial rights to Olympic-related properties, the USOC, a non-governmental organization, is able to function independently of direct government financing and make money.

# data[].attributes.body
Advantages

Lesser strain on the government’s spending on sports which can be used in other areas

Allows for more funding as 3rd party will use this opportunity to make money and will fund it.

Disadvantages

There would not be profit/revenue gained from the sport itself & the involvement of individuals in the sport would not be as prominent.

More prone to ill-willed activities that may disadvantage the development of sports for a gain in greater profit

# data[].attributes.body
The political ideology practiced in the United States (US) to develop the sports industry there would be Neo-liberalism. It can be inferred based on the description given above, where it is stated that the US government has restricted role and the priorities on the market. This is since USOC, a non-government organization, has been given full commercial rights by legislation for properties in the Olympics.

# data[].attributes.body
Advantages:

market forces dictate which sports to develop

sustainable

performance-oriented

does not impose a burden on the government

Disadvantages:

private funding may not be adequate nor sustainable

social objectives of sports de-emphasized; potential marginalization of the poor.

only cares about elite sport, mass participation may be neglected

# data[].attributes.body
Neo-liberalism. Based on the description above, the USOC has full commercialization rights of the Olympics related properties in the US. The national government takes an arms-length, non-interventionist stance towards sports development, delegating authority to a non-governmental organization (NGO) like the United States Olympic Committee (USOC). The USOC derives its powers and rights from legislation (Ted Stevens Act), but operates independently from the government, reflecting neo-liberal principles of limiting state control. The USOC funds Olympic sports development through commercial revenue streams rather than direct government funding, relying on market forces. For professional leagues and other sports businesses, their success is determined primarily by market dynamics rather than centralized state planning or subsidies. This contrasts with more interventionist models like the reformist approach in Australia, where the government directly funds elite training institutes and community sports programs.

# data[].attributes.body
Advantages:

Increase efficiency and innovation by way of a competitive market, where organizations and pro leagues would have to run effectively to earn revenue and captivate fans.

government limitation in terms of authorities and government funding requirements.

Disadvantages:

reliance on sponsorships by corporations which could affect the integrity aspect, where commercial goals would be prioritized through compromising of ethical considerations.

possibility of exploitative behaviors as well as labor disputation due to the absenteeism of regulations

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the political ideology practiced in the US to develop sports in neo-liberalism. Neo-liberalism is when the money that goes into sports only goes to the best-of-the-best type of players, for commercialization and earning money or a combination of both types. Take the NBA for example. There is a lot of money used to develop the NBA in terms of facilities and programs to help those that show a lot of potential that can possibly improve the performance of the players in the league. For another American sports league such as NFL, there will be an advertisement for sponsors every minute or so. This is so the NFL can earn more from advertising. From this example, there is a lot of emphasis on the market and earning money from sports.

# data[].attributes.body
Elite athlete Status:

With ease of accessing a willing portion of the population, they can easily take advantage of their admiration for vice activities

This can be reflected in the Source provided where most of the reasons why the victims did not report were out of fear, not wanting the perpetrator to get into trouble and more that can damage the athlete’s reputation

# data[].attributes.body
It can be observed that the government has limited involvement in the pre-1970s where the national government of Australia gave minimal and basic support in developing sports, while fields and facilities are provided by the local governments. However, most of the funds provided by the national government were not directed to fund most national athletes.

# data[].attributes.body
Since the end of the second world war, the national government provided nothing to most national sport governing bodies and neither did it fund the construction of many sport venues. However, the local government did provide many excellent playing fields and indoor sport facilities and contribute to Olympic and Commonwealth Games teams every two years, providing small annual grants to help life saving clubs to patrol beaches and provide financial assistance to State government run fitness councils.

# data[].attributes.body
I have observed that Australian were very successful on the world sporting stage which produce a proliferation champion in Swimming, Cricket, Rugby League & Cycling with a minimum government support. The national government provided nothing to most national sport governing bodies and did not fund the construction of many sport venues. It only contributed to Olympic and commonwealth games every 2 years which means it was left to run by its own affairs.

However, it changed in 1970s which they established the Ministry of Sport and start to fund program that both increased the number of community leisure centers around Australia & assisted national sporting bodies to improve their operation. The failure of the Olympic Games to win a gold medal at Montreal in 1976 allows the national government to intervene directly in the sports development process. With that, they increase budget from $A5 million to $A150 million to increase Australia sporting infrastructure and expand operations of the national governing bodies for sport.

With that, they want to also strike elusive balance fundamentally between elite development and community sport participation through 4 strategies. Firstly, it aims to develop an effective national sports infrastructure by enhancing the management capabilities of national sporting bodies. Secondly, it aims to improve participation in sport activities by encouraging more people to engage in club-based sports. Third, it aims to provide for continuous improvement in life. Lastly, it aims to provide a climate and culture of fair play.

# data[].attributes.body
The government provides funding and grants to sporting organizations and clubs to support their activities. This funding is aimed at improving facilities, supporting athletes, and promoting participation in sports at all levels.

One such organization is the Australia Sports Commission (ASC). ASC has been established to promote and support sports development across the country. ASC is governed by a Board of Commissioners appointed by the Minister of Sport. ASC encourages and help Australians of all backgrounds, ages and abilities to get involved in sport and enjoy the many benefits. ASC delivers various grants through investment in high performance and national sport participation programs, performance pathways, people development and wellbeing, and research and innovation.

# data[].attributes.body
Before the end of the second world war, Australia has been building up sport development and management with local governments providing facilities and the national government providing very little to the funding of facilities and sporting venues, only contributing to national events such as the Olympics and Commonwealth Games and providing small annual grants to clubs and other sports.

After the end of the second world war, the national government became more involved in sports in Australia. A ministry of sport was established which started funding programs that promoted sport amongst its citizens, such as establishing more community leisure centers and improving the operation of national sporting organizations.

# data[].attributes.body
Professional sports leagues are for-profit enterprises, and the American sports industry is highly marketed and privatized. Thus, working in this field contributes to a large income through sales and publicity. Furthermore, because they are the company owners managing the team and sport, they possess the insight and mindset to approach it from a business perspective, placing a significant emphasis on optimizing revenue return. Furthermore, there is a lot of public support in America, which has increased funding for infrastructure and given rise to certain sponsorship opportunities. Because of this, all parties involved in the sports sector stand to gain financially in the long run. Additionally, since America has such a large population, increased popular support will also translate into big financial gains. The sport industry in America will thus become a billion-dollar sector through commercialization, privatization, and public assistance, all of which will help contribute to the cash produced. Adding on, there are implementations of private ownerships of professional sports such as NHL where they do get a huge sum of money in return despite not being funded by the government which might be risky if anything was to go wrong throughout the various events. Sponsorships and funds are generally invested in elite athletes.

# data[].attributes.body
High Performance: Australian Institute of Sport (AIS), athlete scholarships grants elite coach education

Management improvement: Australian Sports Commission (ASC) training programmes, grants for management improvement and staff training

Economic benefits: Government agencies to secure significant sports festivals and championships. Subsidies to ensure the viability of mega-sport events.

Community participation: Programmes and funding to encourage greater participation at grass-roots level. Working with national sport bodies to develop modified games and implement junior development programmes.

Social capital: Volunteer training programmes and grants to local sport bodies to improve sport facilities and administrative systems.

Diversity and equity: Women’s sports programmes, anti-harassment and anti-discrimination programmes  including design of member protection policies (MPP), funding to assist indigenous and disabled sports.

Drug education and enforcement: Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), Drug education programmes, testing and sanctions

# data[].attributes.body
Professional sports leagues are for-profit enterprises, and the American sports industry is highly marketed and privatized. Thus, working in this field contributes to a large income through sales and publicity. Furthermore, because they are the company owners managing the team and sport, they possess the insight and mindset to approach it from a business perspective, placing a significant emphasis on optimizing revenue return. Furthermore, there is a lot of public support in America, which has increased funding for infrastructure and given rise to certain sponsorship opportunities. Because of this, all parties involved in the sports sector stand to gain financially in the long run. Additionally, since America has such a large population, increased popular support will also translate into big financial gains. The sport industry in America will thus become a billion-dollar sector through commercialization, privatization, and public assistance, all of which will help contribute to the cash produced. Adding on, there are implementations of private ownerships of professional sports such as NHL where they do get a huge sum of money in return despite not being funded by the government which might be risky if anything was to go wrong throughout the various events. Sponsorships and funds are generally invested in elite athletes.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the government plays a huge role in political ''Reformism'' ideology in Australia which helps the sports industry & people there to thrive and develop further by the help. The ‘’help’’ comes in forms such as investing money for venues, equipment/high facilities and proper infrastructure for both elite athletes and sports for all. Adding on, as an elite athlete too, this would be beneficial for them in terms of enhancing their several skillsets with the right and proper training areas & equipment which would then allow the sports industry to thrive with several awards attained by them. As the emphasis is not only on elite athletes, other individuals can benefit from this to promote a healthier lifestyle and participation in their respective sports. This promotes social justice & equality for both elite athletes and people living in Australia.

# data[].attributes.body
Though the creation of sports facilities can provide jobs and economic opportunities, these opportunities don’t even come yearly such as high profile events such as the Olympics and other international events which unlike building a factory doesn’t immediately recuperate the costs of building it through an output.

Taxpayers are asked to pay for a stadium, typically through a dedicated sales tax but almost all the economic benefits are received by team owners and players who are not exactly hurting as much as taxpayers are. Additionally, a common goal of stadium wars is to increase stadium revenues, which affects average fans, who are the ones paying most of the taxes end up getting priced out.

This is also not including tax payers who are not physically active or don’t use the stadium in the first place. As the some of these specialised facilities are ment for elite athletes and are unusable for the average joe in sports who does it to stay active.