Lip syncing: a must for Olympics?

Just as nobody had predicted the magnificent opening ceremony at the Beijing Olympics Games, no one had expected that one of the low point of this Olympics is not doping but lip syncing by a 9-year old.

While most of people using this as their Olympic gossip, they didn't know the following fact:
First, it is the music director of the ceremony disclosed the lip syncing voluntarily as a "behind the scenes director's comment" as well as publicly giving credit to the girl who did the singing. What he didn't realized is that while he said "not perfect looking" was transformed by the media as "ugly". And this is the media claimed that they were worried about the psychological damage to both girls.

Secondly, it is common practice in Chinese and Hong Kong films to have a professional singer to sing for the picture perfect actors/actresses. Guess the director of "Momma Mia" didn't know this is an option. To many, this is a show that you want to be perfect for the audience to enjoy the performance. It turned out some (or most) of them may not care whose voice it is.

Thirdly, don't be surprised, this may be the Olympic tradition. In 2006 at Turin, the great Pavarotti was lip syncing to his tape; in 2002 at Salt Lake City, the televised opening ceremony was not live (except for the athletes), but a rehearsal taped earlier. What most shocking is that in 2000 at Sydney, the Sydney Symphony Orchestra was string-syncing to a pre-recorded symphony and, wait for this, part of the recording was done by the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra.

The amazing part is that all these facts at other Olympics were not disclosed voluntarily. The organizers admitted the syncing facts only after been caught. However, unlike the Beijing Olympics, none of these made to main stream news. No wonder the Beijing organizers and the Chinese felt they were treated unfairly.

Here is a blog on the Times: Sydney Comes Clean on Olympic Miming. Comparing to the front page coverage of the Beijing lip syncing, this is not even on the printed edition, but only on the web site.

The original source is from the Sydney Morning Herald:

"As a result, the Sydney Symphony's confirmation that it mimed its entire performance at the opening ceremony of the 2000 Sydney Olympics comes as something of a shock. Even worse, it admits the backing tape was recorded, in part, by its southern rival, the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra."

The DNC convention and the Bill Clinton speech

The biggest thing on the news after the Olympics is the DNC convention. Somehow, it all looks much like either late night infomercials and televangelicals.

The only exception to that is President Clinton's speech tonight, from Zimbio.

I am honored to be here tonight to support Barack Obama. And to warm up the crowd for Joe Biden, though as you’ll soon see, he doesn’t need any help from me. I love Joe Biden, and America will too.

What a year we Democrats have had. The primary began with an all-star line up and came down to two remarkable Americans locked in a hard fought contest to the very end. The campaign generated so much heat it increased global warming.

In the end, my candidate didn’t win. But I’m very proud of the campaign she ran: she never quit on the people she stood up for, on the changes she pushed for, on the future she wants for all our children. And I’m grateful for the chance Chelsea and I had to tell Americans about the person we know and love.

I’m not so grateful for the chance to speak in the wake of her magnificent address last night. But I’ll do my best.

Hillary told us in no uncertain terms that she’ll do everything she can to elect Barack Obama.

That makes two of us.

Actually that makes 18 million of us - because, like Hillary, I want all of you who supported her to vote for Barack Obama in November.

Here’s why.

Our nation is in trouble on two fronts: The American Dream is under siege at home, and America’s leadership in the world has been weakened.

Middle class and low-income Americans are hurting, with incomes declining; job losses, poverty and inequality rising; mortgage foreclosures and credit card debt increasing; health care coverage disappearing; and a big spike in the cost of food, utilities, and gasoline.

Our position in the world has been weakened by too much unilateralism and too little cooperation; a perilous dependence on imported oil; a refusal to lead on global warming; a growing indebtedness and a dependence on foreign lenders; a severely burdened military; a backsliding on global non-proliferation and arms control agreements; and a failure to consistently use the power of diplomacy, from the Middle East to Africa to Latin America to Central and Eastern Europe.

Clearly, the job of the next President is to rebuild the American Dream and restore America’s standing in the world.

Everything I learned in my eight years as President and in the work I’ve done since, in America and across the globe, has convinced me that Barack Obama is the man for this job.

He has a remarkable ability to inspire people, to raise our hopes and rally us to high purpose. He has the intelligence and curiosity every successful President needs. His policies on the economy, taxes, health care and energy are far superior to the Republican alternatives. He has shown a clear grasp of our foreign policy and national security challenges, and a firm commitment to repair our badly strained military. His family heritage and life experiences have given him a unique capacity to lead our increasingly diverse nation and to restore our leadership in an ever more interdependent world. The long, hard primary tested and strengthened him. And in his first presidential decision, the selection of a running mate, he hit it out of the park.

With Joe Biden’s experience and wisdom, supporting Barack Obama’s proven understanding, insight, and good instincts, America will have the national security leadership we need.

Barack Obama is ready to lead America and restore American leadership in the world. Ready to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Barack Obama is ready to be President of the United States.

He will work for an America with more partners and fewer adversaries. He will rebuild our frayed alliances and revitalize the international institutions which help to share the costs of the world’s problems and to leverage our power and influence. He will put us back in the forefront of the world’s fight to reduce nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and to stop global warming. He will continue and enhance our nation’s global leadership in an area in which I am deeply involved, the fight against AIDS, TB and malaria, including a renewal of the battle against HIV/AIDS here at home. He will choose diplomacy first and military force as a last resort. But in a world troubled by terror; by trafficking in weapons, drugs and people; by human rights abuses; by other threats to our security, our interests, and our values, when he cannot convert adversaries into partners, he will stand up to them.

Barack Obama also will not allow the world’s problems to obscure its opportunities. Everywhere, in rich and poor countries alike, hardworking people need good jobs; secure, affordable healthcare, food, and energy; quality education for their children; and economically beneficial ways to fight global warming. These challenges cry out for American ideas and American innovation. When Barack Obama unleashes them, America will save lives, win new allies, open new markets, and create new jobs for our people.

Most important, Barack Obama knows that America cannot be strong abroad unless we are strong at home. People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power.

Look at the example the Republicans have set: American workers have given us consistently rising productivity. They’ve worked harder and produced more. What did they get in return? Declining wages, less than ¼ as many new jobs as in the previous eight years, smaller health care and pension benefits, rising poverty and the biggest increase in income inequality since the 1920s. American families by the millions are struggling with soaring health care costs and declining coverage. I will never forget the parents of children with autism and other severe conditions who told me on the campaign trail that they couldn’t afford health care and couldn’t qualify their kids for Medicaid unless they quit work or got a divorce. Are these the family values the Republicans are so proud of? What about the military families pushed to the breaking point by unprecedented multiple deployments? What about the assault on science and the defense of torture? What about the war on unions and the unlimited favors for the well connected? What about Katrina and cronyism?

America can do better than that. And Barack Obama will.

But first we have to elect him.

The choice is clear. The Republicans will nominate a good man who served our country heroically and suffered terribly in Vietnam. He loves our country every bit as much as we all do. As a Senator, he has shown his independence on several issues. But on the two great questions of this election, how to rebuild the American Dream and how to restore America’s leadership in the world, he still embraces the extreme philosophy which has defined his party for more than 25 years, a philosophy we never had a real chance to see in action until 2001, when the Republicans finally gained control of both the White House and Congress. Then we saw what would happen to America if the policies they had talked about for decades were implemented.

They took us from record surpluses to an exploding national debt; from over 22 million new jobs down to 5 million; from an increase in working family incomes of $7,500 to a decline of more than $2,000; from almost 8 million Americans moving out of poverty to more than 5 and a half million falling into poverty - and millions more losing their health insurance.

Now, in spite of all the evidence, their candidate is promising more of the same: More tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans that will swell the deficit, increase inequality, and weaken the economy. More band-aids for health care that will enrich insurance companies, impoverish families and increase the number of uninsured. More going it alone in the world, instead of building the shared responsibilities and shared opportunities necessary to advance our security and restore our influence.

They actually want us to reward them for the last eight years by giving them four more. Let’s send them a message that will echo from the Rockies all across America: Thanks, but no thanks. In this case, the third time is not the charm.

My fellow Democrats, sixteen years ago, you gave me the profound honor to lead our party to victory and to lead our nation to a new era of peace and broadly shared prosperity.

Together, we prevailed in a campaign in which the Republicans said I was too young and too inexperienced to be Commander-in-Chief. Sound familiar? It didn’t work in 1992, because we were on the right side of history. And it won’t work in 2008, because Barack Obama is on the right side of history.

His life is a 21st Century incarnation of the American Dream. His achievements are proof of our continuing progress toward the “more perfect union” of our founders’ dreams. The values of freedom and equal opportunity which have given him his historic chance will drive him as president to give all Americans, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability, their chance to build a decent life, and to show our humanity, as well as our strength, to the world.

We see that humanity, that strength, and our future in Barack and Michelle Obama and their beautiful children. We see them reinforced by the partnership with Joe Biden, his wife Jill, a dedicated teacher, and their family.

Barack Obama will lead us away from division and fear of the last eight years back to unity and hope. If, like me, you still believe America must always be a place called Hope, then join Hillary, Chelsea and me in making Senator Barack Obama the next President of the United States.

Michelle Obama: the next Hilary?

Michelle Obama spoke tonight about her husband, her own dream, and the campaign on the opening night of the Democrat National Convention in Denver. It is the first time I watch her doing an official speech. She is confident, aspiring, and, above all, a great speaker.

Much better than her husband.

Tonight, what I saw was not Michelle, but the young Hillary when Bill was running in 92. Of course, the difference is that this time, the husband is not Bill Clinton. Let's see how the race is going in the next 72 days.

McCain is on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. All jokes aside, he does seem very old, very different from two elections ago when he's fighting Bush.

May be this is the Democrat's time?

2008 Beijing Olympics Games: The director's cut

Today's closing ceremony is short and sweet. Given the magnificent moments (the grand opening, Phelps, Bolt, ...) all on high definition for the first time ever, I'd wish there will be a Blue Ray DVD set with all these fantastic memories. Of course, I'd like an Opening Ceremony: Director's Cut, not the NBC version.

Here's an interesting comments about the over all experiences.

"If the Beijing Olympics has done anything, it is to push people to be more realistic, more grounded, and have a better grasp of China. If that means a good bit of their romanticism (e.g. respect) is lost with their pre-conceived notions about China, so be it. It’s a net positive because they come ever closer to experiencing China and all of its problems as Chinese themselves do."

Best moment of the 2008 Olympics

It's from LA Times' online entertainment section.

The 31th is Morgan Freeman's Visa commercial:

"There are 6 billion of us. We all come from unique places with unique ways of looking at the world. We don't always agree. But for a few shining weeks we set it all aside. We come together to stand and cheer and celebrate as one. We forget all the things that make us different and remember all the things that make us the same."

The gymnasts' age problem at the Olympics

In most cases, age is quite a sensitive question that one should be very careful to ask. Of course, one reason for this sensitivity is because of the "desired age" is always not what the real age: be that a teen wants to look older (to be taken seriously or ...) or I being happy whenever someone ask me which school I'm attending (trust me, this doesn't happen often, if at all).

The real reason behind this puzzle is that it is impossible to tell how old someone really is, at least not within a small margin of error, say 2 years. At the same time, unlike doping steroid, there is yet a test that you can trust. The bone age test have a fairly large margin of error (only ~80% accurate) that it can't be used with court-proof confidence, according to this study. Besides, it only tells the biological age, not chronological age.

X-ray radiography of a 9-year old girl with a bone age of 8.

Now you will understand that why everybody can speculate the chronological age of the small Chinese gymnasts: They can say whatever they want, there is just no true proof.

Disclosure: I'm not implying here that you should trust whatever government document says or everything from news media. For those in doubt, please check out what Cheney (or everybody in the Administration) said about WMD and the infamouse Jessica Lynch/Pat Tillman circus.

Here's a funny column about this by ESPN's Jim Caple.

"Hasn't the IOC been paying attention to American Olympic coverage over the decades? Our Olympians are always clean. It's the other athletes who cheat like foreign accountants in offshore tax havens."

"The Olympics aren't about which country wins the most gold medals; they're about which country wins the most medals, period. ... Besides, the "official" gold tally neglects all the multiple golds we've won on relay teams and in other team sports. This just isn't fair."

"Something, after all, must be done to prevent immature, underage girls from being thrown into an intense, pressure-packed international competition they are far too young to handle emotionally. Forcing a young girl to compete like that would be like entering a 6-year-old in a beauty contest, or a fifth grader in a national spelling bee, or expecting an 11-year-old boy to compete in a worldwide baseball tournament on national TV. Americans just don't believe in placing that kind of pressure on children."

The tiebreaker, the US gymnastics, and the Karolyis

In today's Olympic Gymnastics competition, there are two ties in over all score for gold: one is men's vault and the other is women's uneven bars. Going through a specially designed tiebreaker process (up to six steps) instituted by the International Olympic Committee after the 1996 Atlanta games, the ties have been broken and Leszek Blanik won the gold medal for vault and Kexing He got the gold in uneven bars.

To me, this is just the same as Phelps the great won his 100 butterfly two days ago, there are a system of rules to follow and that is it. In fact, both athletes in these events are real champions. Especially for Nastia Liukin, who handled the situation extremely well, considering the difficult circumstances. All Americans should be proud of her.

She was quoted the following in an article on the Times:

"Liukin said she thought the scoring was fair, even mentioning that she thought Yang, the bronze-medalist, might have been underscored. In a subjectively judged sport, outcomes like this sometimes happened, she said."

At the same time, her fellow Americans, sadly including some so called journalists, were not that graceful. Many started to call the rule obscure and unreasonable, just short of following the idiotic Bela Karolyi that "the Chinese stole the medal again!".

In the overwhelming comments on these news stories, I'm glad there are quite a few rather rational about this. A good comment on the Post's explanation of the tiebreaker article is quoted here:

"One comedian captured this fracas succinctly: "why is it that after watching the Olympics for an hour, everyone suddenly thinks that they are experts in a sport they've rarely watched before?"

People like Bela Karoyli do not help in this situation - why is he even getting so much coverage? His wife is the coach! It's so unbelievable that NBC is letting him scream and cry (literally) like some lunatic on prime time television when he's basically the coach of the US team.

I for one am proud that the athletes themselves have not descended into this "sour grapes" mode that a lot of the commentators have, and that their own coaches have. If the scoring process is flawed, complain about it and work to fix it, but don't denigrate the sport with such pettiness.

Posted by: rhadams | August 18, 2008 1:27 PM"

My take on this is almost the same as this one on the same article:

"1) I will not try to second-guess human error or bias in judging;
2) Nastia behandles herself like a true olympian and (co-)champion.
3) As long as the rule is set beforehand, I have no problem with it. The same tie-breaker is used in men's vault today - and I didn't heard a lot of support for the French siler mealist.
4) Last but not last, please and please do not use Bella Karolyi's NBC comment to support you arguments. Would you use a judge's wife's comment to support a judge's decision?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 18, 2008 2:21 PM"

By "almost", I had more disguise to the Karolyis. They are basically making money from training the US women's gymnastics team in Texas. They have monetary interests in bashing China in the hopes that their own incompetence may be overlooked. For example, in this story on the LA Times, he was quoted:

"If that sounds complicated, former U.S. national coach Bela Karolyi didn't understand how the tiebreak process worked. He thought the scores from qualifying were used, and that would have given Liukin the gold medal."

For someone doing this for a living, if he didn't understand the rules, which has been instituted since 1996, he is incompetent. If he continues to basing the judge, the system, and the opponents with racist demeaning language, he is a pathetic looser.

Please note that his highest career point is to coach Nadia Comaneci to the first perfect 10 in the 1976, when Comaneci was only 14 years old. While calling the Chinese "half people" on national TV, he is the most vocal opponent of the 16-years age limit instituted by the Federation of Gymnastics.

To me, this is the real disgrace to the Olympic spirit.

For NBC, they could use some better misjudgment themselves so to avoid using such a lunatic on prime time national TV. Oh, that may be too high an expectation for NBC who decided to get rid of Jay Leno.

For the LA Times, who continues to quote the Karolyis, this is why "the Times" is for the New York Times.

Putin: checkmate!

This is an excellent piece from Michael Binyon of London Times about the recent crisis in Georgia Republic. The recent development showed a typical example of double standard with regarding to international politics.

Specifically in the case of George, it is the stupid Georgian President Saakashvili who thought he may stole a base while both Putin and Bush were in Beijing watching some sporting events. What he didn't understand is that superpowers don't have to be on alert all the time. They have plenty of time to response to "acts will not gone unpunished." May not be today, but one doesn't have to wait very long.

"Moscow can also counter Georgian PR, the last weapon left to Tbilisi. Human rights? Look at what Georgia has done in South Ossetia (and also in Abkhazia). National sovereignty? Look at the detachment of Kosovo from Serbia. False pretexts? Look at Ronald Reagan's invasion of Grenada to “rescue” US medical students. Western outrage? Look at the confused cacophony."

The Opening Ceremony’s memorable moments from an NFL sports reporter

It is a pretty good piece about the opening ceremony.




"Maybe the only way to understand how fulfilling the 2008 Opening Ceremony was is to think four years in advance to the 2012 games, and pity the city of London. "

"This was the oddity of the night. Behind the Chinese president and the entire national team, the one athlete who appeared to get the loudest ovation was none other than Kobe Bean Bryant. The moment was so odd that even U.S. journalists were looking at each other in puzzlement. The Russian, Chinese and American presidents were here, but Kobe was the head of state tonight."

"You know an Olympics has gotten off on the right foot when the torch lighting ceremony really grabs you. Muhammad Ali at the 1996 games in Atlanta was a proud and heartfelt moment. The flaming arrow in the 1992 games in Barcelona was inventive and daring. But Beijing set a mind-bending standard that defied belief."



Read the full story here at Yahoo Sports!

Beijing Olympics 2008: best show ever

The opening ceremony is spectacular! The imagination, creativity, and performance are breathtaking and magnificent. This is also the first year that the Olympics are on high definition. The picture quality are awesome.