Canadians Losing Interest in Hockey: Report
According to a report by Reginald Bibby of the University of Lethbridge, interest in the National Hockey League has dropped off among Canadians. In an Edmonton Journal article this morning, Bibby says 'his findings debunk the myth of "hockey-mad" Canadians, and call into question the game's endurance as our national winter sport.'
My favorite quote:
"It's one of the few Canadian myths we have, this alleged (nationwide) love of hockey," says Bibby. "So, these results will annoy some people, and initially we'll see some questioning of reality."
Well now, I wouldn't want to be one to question reality, but it seems to me that Bibby's making statements that aren't supported by his findings. His numbers are as follows:
- Between 1990 and 2005, the percentage of adults who "very" or "fairly" closely followed the NHL dropped from 36% to 30%
- Between 1992 and 2008, the percentage of teenagers who were fans fell from 45% to 35%
- In the 2008 study, country of origin played a strong role in who followed the game. Hockey fans made up 40% of children of Canadian-born parents, 33% of children who were Canadian-born but had one (or more) immigrant parents, and just 20% of children born outside the country.
The immigrant factor in particular is one worth looking at. The percentage of Canadians who were foreign-born has increased dramatically over the years Bibby compares; in 1991 immigrants represented 16.1% of the population while in 2006 that number had increased to 19.8% - a 3.7% shift; or just under two-thirds of the drop in hockey interest between 1990 and 2005 (which, combined with the 3% margin of error, 19 times out of 20, puts the drop nicely in the irrelevant zone) A new immigrant coming to Canada likely will never have been exposed to hockey to the degree that he would be in Canada, and naturally cannot be expected to have the same affinity for it as a natural-born Canadian. The teen study strongly hints at this - taking some liberties with the numbers, it would seem that a recent immigrant (a teen born outside the country) has a 20% chance of being a hockey fan, while his children would have a 33% chance, and his grandchildren a 40% chance.
In other words, for Bibby's prediction about the demise of the sport to come true, he would need either a) a continual sharp increase in the total percentage of the population made up of immigrants or b) a lack of assimilation on both immigrants and their children and their grandchildren. Neither seems likely, at least not in the numbers required to make his conclusions accurate. In point of fact, Bibby explicitly argued against (b) back in March of 2008.
It's also rather interesting that Bibby calls Canada's love of hockey a "myth" and says that his findings "call into question the game's endurance as our national winter sport." I call it interesting because Bibby's primary field of study is actually religious data. Last year, Bibby talked about how organized religion in Canada has known "relative health" based on data showing weekly/monthly attendance in the 25/34 percent range. How organized religion can be healthy with 25% weekly attendance while hockey can have it's endurance as Canada's national winter sport questioned with 30% of the population either very or fairly closely following it is beyond me.
It's also interesting to note that this supposed decline of the sport has not been a straight line. Bibby acknowledges on his blog that in 1995 the number increased to 38% (he acknowledges this while complaining that hockey has morphed from a seasonal to a year-round sport) - numbers that would seem to support the point of view that hockey will experience an ebb-and-flow in interest based on any number of factors (like any other complex system, for that matter - body temperature constantly fluctuates, stock prices bounce up and down from hour to hour, etc.).
In other words, I think a lot of Bibby's findings can be rather easily explained away, and I find it rather more likely that his conclusions about the demise of the sport stem from either a) personal feeling or b) the desire to generate some publicity for his work. Regardless, the data certainly isn't firm enough for the sweeping generalizations that he makes.
0 recs |
5 comments
|
Comments
I agree. And I’m going to go with b.) to generate publicity.
Much ado about nothing.
by Kent Wilson on Aug 7, 2009 10:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I read that article in the paper this morning, and I agree entirely with your take on it, Mr. Willis. I too had my attention caught by the quote that you mentioned:
“It’s one of the few Canadian myths we have, this alleged (nationwide) love of hockey,” says Bibby. “So, these results will annoy some people, and initially we’ll see some questioning of reality.”
The fact that Bibby pre-emptively issues such a blanket dismissal of all criticism of his claims tells me that he knows that his numbers don’t support his position.
As for whether this all comes from personal dislike of hockey or from desire for publicity, well, I’m going to go with “all of the above.”
by Chunklets on Aug 7, 2009 11:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I missed the part where the study actually showed that people don’t care about hockey. I believe it was specifically about the NHL. So Bibby’s comments are completely off-base with his own research. Hell, I’m actually finding my own interest in the NHL waning, to be perfectly honest. The fact that both of my favoured teams have been mediocre for most of the last 20 years hasn’t helped, but more than anything, I think it’s because I go to at least 40 WHL games per year, and no NHL games. Certainly, I can see why people who grew up in the 90s with a game that was both dull and inaccessible to the majority might never catch the fever in the first place.
It probably doesn’t help that we’ve become less of a sporting culture in general, and more of an electronic one. I hate seeing video games as a boogeyman for society’s ills (just like comic books, rock and roll, slasher flicks, and rap before them), but I can’t imagine they’ve helped matters any, simply by being another distraction on top of a billion others.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there)
by Doogie2K on Aug 7, 2009 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Bibby should understand that correlation does not equal causation and that.
It’s interesting to compare apples to oranges while adding oranges and then saying that the ratio of apples to oranges is getting depressingly low. Well no shit, but you’re just still assuming that assimilation to the hockey sphere of influence is nonexistent.My immigrant father didn’t want me to watch hockey as a kid because he thought I would be too distracted to do other things. I watched and played hockey anyway despite this and I found out years later that he used to watch hockey himself before I was born (which he never told me), which was ironic. But I don’t think makes me an exception, either. I just wonder who the audience of the survey is and who the participants are.
A new immigrant coming to Canada likely will never have been exposed to hockey to the degree that he would be in Canada, and naturally cannot be expected to have the same affinity for it as a natural-born Canadian.
Please compare Milan Lucic to the countless junior Canadian players who never make the big show. Competence has less to do with exposure than it has to do with natural ability and hours of practice. A Canadian who watches hockey all their life as will not be more competent than an immigrant (with a knack for staying at the rink for extra hours) based on years of exposure alone.
I think that the most simple explanation is that hockey cannot compete with other major sports because of the difficulty of maintaining a grassroots presence at a cheaper opportunity cost. Compare the cost of playing basketball on a team as opposed to playing hockey on a team. Furthermore, it is harder to televise an 82 game schedule as opposed to a 16 game schedule.
RT40 writes with An Oilers Refinery and is an avid hockey fan.
by raventalon40 on Aug 7, 2009 7:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There’s plenty of examples of good immigrant players; the point was not playing ability but rather that without the level of exposure that Canadians get, immigrant families would be decidedly odd if they already were watching a ton of hockey upon arrival.
A posse ad esse.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and OilersNation.
by Jonathan Willis on Aug 10, 2009 7:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 






















