How TBWA’s ‘The Doping Divide’ Is Framing the Future of Fair Play
Last month, TBWA launched a short documentary titled The Doping Divide, featuring Australian swimmer James Magnussen, to challenge the belief that doping only results in unfair sport. The film is part of a series from TBWA’s cultural intelligence unit, Backlash. The ‘Life on the Edge’ series explores how doping might create a more level playing field in sports by addressing evolving notions of fairness.
Speaking to LBB, Cecelia Girr, director of cultural strategy at TBWA Worldwide, explores the provocative subject of doping in sport through the lens of ‘The Doping Divide’.
Cecelia discusses the inspiration behind focusing on doping, the decision to feature James Magnussen as the sole athlete publicly embracing this issue, and how the film challenges our understanding of fairplay in sport. She also explores how this work contributes to TBWA's broader ‘Future of Sport’ report and anticipates the ongoing debate surrounding performance enhancement.
LBB> What inspired you to focus on the controversial topic of doping in sport, particularly with James Magnussen's involvement?
Cecelia> This is a topic we’ve been watching for quite some time now. More specifically, at Backslash, we’ve been following all the new potential advantages in sport — from grassroots biohacking and neuro-training to full-body MRI scans and specialised equipment. We’ve been interested in how these advancements might allow us to push the boundaries of athleticism in the future, how they might be integrated into or regulated within the context of sport, and, more broadly, how their use might alter our perceptions of fairness in sport. Of course, doping sits into this broader conversation.
When the news broke about the creation of the Enhanced Games as this ‘modern reinvention’ of the Olympics where athletes are encouraged to dope — we knew it was something we wanted to investigate further within the Future of Sport. Mainly because it’s a topic that’s still very taboo in the category. While it’s been said that over 900 athletes have expressed interest, the fact that James Magnussen was and still is the only professional athlete to do so publicly speaks to the immense hurdles in changing or engaging in a more dynamic cultural conversation around the topic.
LBB> How does "The Doping Divide" aim to challenge the traditional views on fairness in sport?
Cecelia> The title says it all. There is a very wide chasm between the two ideological standpoints here. On one side, you have those who believe that doping is inherently unfair and, for the most part, believe it is an affront to the purity of sport. On the other hand, you have those who challenge the dominant belief by engaging with it. In James Magnussen’s view, doping in sports — if regulated and done responsibly — might have the potential to unlock a fairer future.
The divide here is understandable, as PEDs have been synonymous with secrecy and cheating for so long. And understandably, there are many concerns around safety and morality. So, there’s still a lot of grey area to navigate. Our aim was simply to explore the tension. The reality is that modern culture still sees ‘doping’ as taboo. In many countries, using performance-enhancing substances is still against the law. As with any taboo, engaging with the topic is a direct challenge to traditional views who wish to only speak to it in a specific way. So, where most coverage on the Enhanced Games gives the headlines and the critique, we wanted ‘The Doping Divide’ to engage with the idea in a more thoughtful way that embraces areas of optimism and rejects the all-or-nothing outlook.
LBB> Could you share more about the decision to feature James Magnussen and how his perspective influenced the direction of the documentary?
Cecelia> For us, it made the most sense to hear from the only professional athlete to publicly announce interest and involvement.
LBB> The concept of 'fair play' is central to the Olympic Games. How does this documentary redefine or disrupt that notion?
Cecelia> In our report, we explore how definitions of fairness are changing through the lens of three core questions: Who has the right to compete? Where do we draw the line when it comes to performance-enhancing advantages? And what level of physical and mental risk is acceptable?
‘The Doping Divide’ provides a perspective on that second question. In Magnussen’s view, the fact that every athlete in the Enhanced Games will be openly doping makes it “the first time there’s a truly level playing field in international sport.” That’s undoubtedly a diverging perspective from how culture traditionally views ‘fair play’ in sports. So, as cultural investigators, we wanted to explore this more.
LBB> How does "The Doping Divide" tie into TBWA's broader 'Future of Sport' report, particularly the "Fair Play" section?
Cecelia> Doping is on the proverbial ‘front lines’ of our cultural conversation on notions of fairness. More specifically, it sits within this more extensive discussion about ‘The Optimised Athlete’ — and the new debates around the need to maintain the purity of sport versus the desire to optimise performance at all costs.
LBB> How do you anticipate the public, especially sports enthusiasts and athletes, will react to the idea of doping as a means to level the playing field?
Cecelia> This is something that people are reacting strongly to. We are seeing the pushback right now, which is highlighted in most media coverage on the Enhanced Games. But I believe that behind closed doors, sports enthusiasts and athletes are and will continue to debate this idea with their friends.
Ultimately, we believe this will lead people to question their feelings on fairness in sport as a whole and what a fair game looks like. And I think that’s a healthy debate to have.
LBB> How do you see "The Doping Divide" contributing to the ongoing debate about the ethics of performance enhancement in professional sports?
Cecelia> Ultimately, it’s a drop in the bucket. But I think the reality is that the debate isn’t being had in public spaces — only behind closed doors. This is a very hush-hush topic. Professionals are scared to speak out on the topic for fear of being cancelled or losing endorsement deals. So, in the absence of those perspectives out in public discourse, we wanted to share the perspective of one professional athlete who is interested in using PEDs now that he is retired. And I think that’s a perspective worth hearing.
