The normative discourse of anti-doping policy

Abstract

Despite the progress made towards integrating global anti-doping efforts, the use of performance-enhancing substances in sport remains a legitimate, if misunderstood, concern. While public attitudes have become increasingly tolerant towards methods of performance enhancement in everyday matters, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and its related organizations continue to take a strong prohibitive stance against performance enhancement in sport. This study employs methods of critical discursive analysis in an investigation of the World Anti-Doping Code. While research in this area has become somewhat prolific, systematic analyses of this type are few. The text of the World Anti-Doping Code was analysed for the evidence of discursive themes, which were then combined and interpreted to produce more comprehensive discourses. The findings of this study suggest two major discourses to which the text in question contributes: a discourse of authority, and a normative discourse of sport. These discourses produce a system that makes it easier for WADA to maintain unquestioned authority and use this authority to constrain the conditions under which sport may exist.

Be(coming) clean: Confessions as governance in professional cycling

“…This research provides timely empirical data to support claims of WADA hegemony (as the anti-doping authority) over the anti-doping process (see Jedlicka 2012;Hunt et al 2012;Sluggett 2011). Clean cycling has been touted by a range of institutional actors, notably confessed PED athletes, as a new response to PED use in sport.…”

Analysing sport policy and politics: the promises and challenges of synthesising methodological approaches

“…Fairclough's arguments concerning the importance of scrutinising the ideological context of discourse through the use of a CDA approach have been applied to a number of issues within the field of sport. For example, applications of CDA have been seen in past analyses of such issues as sports media discourse and representations (Kelly 2010, Liao and Markula 2009, Wolter 2015, physical education and youth sport (Mean andKassing 2008, Rich andGiles 2014), sports advertising and marketing (Lee 2015), and sport policy discourse (Jedlicka 2014, Piggin, Jackson and Lewis 2009, Piggin, 2014. The wide variety of topics and methodological approaches embraced within this corpus of CDA-oriented research in sport suggests the continuing relevance of exploring the predominant discursive patterns which emanate from the sporting world.…”

Defining a problem to fit the solution: A neo-institutional explanation for legitimising the bid for the 2016 Lillehammer winter Youth Olympic Games

“…Discourse analysis builds on written and spoken language structured in patterns (Jørgensen and Phillips 1999) and can be employed as a tool where argumentation is necessary, for example to influence the environment within which a decision will be made (Sam 2003, Kristiansen 2010. Discourse analysis has been used widely as a methodological tool to understand processes of sport policy-making (Finlayson 2004, Green 2004, Green and Houlihan 2005, Hayhurst 2009, Piggin et al 2009, Piggin 2010, Agergaard 2011, Berg and Chalip 2012, Jedlicka 2012, Straume and Hasselgård 2013, Hasselgård and Straume 2015.…”