to 2013, and the FIFA World Cup enjoyed a very distinct
popular image. The protests that broke out over the summer of 2013 in Brazil were ostensibly about an increase
in the cost of public transportation, but soon expanded
into a more widespread discussion about Brazil’s spending on social welfare. “Hospitals and schools abiding by
FIFA standards,” demanded the protesters - a reference
to FIFA’s high standards for stadium quality, in a country
where health and education quality are still lagging behind.
The US$11 billion price tag of the World Cup increasingly came under scrutiny, especially when compared
to the measly 5 percent of GDP spent on education. What
was supposed to be a political triumph for President
Dilma Rousseff soon turned into a constant topic of controversy. The decision not to allow street vendors to sell
at the game, for example, led to popular uproar. Rousseff
eventually had to push her weight to waive registration
fees and FIFA sponsor companies’ prerogatives. Brazilian
soccer legend Ronaldo stirred more controversy yet with
his response to the demands of the protesters, on which
he was famously quoted as saying “World Cups aren’t
made with hospitals.” In preparation for more riots, the
immediately tweeted President Rousseff. That was not
enough to stem the flood of comments decrying the government online after the national team’s defeat. The slogan
used the year before to decry spending on the World Cup,
não vai ter copa (there will be no cup), suddenly reappeared
on social media. “A Brazilian tragedy,” wrote newspapers
both home and abroad. Dilma Rousseff’s approval ratings fell along with the nation’s prestige. “Soccer reflects
politics, and Brazil doesn’t deserve to be the champion of
anything,” wrote a Twitter user from Brasilia. What was
meant to be a ͡