When the “Taylor Swift Effect” is
Incorrect
Focusing on the fan over the celebrity in design
Recently, we at Studio Vibrant came across an architect’s opinion piece that provided his perspective on how stadium design should respond to the “Taylor Swift Effect”. As female design professionals who love to attend and watch sporting events, we were eager to review his thoughts on the changing demographics of attendees and move this topic into a broader conversation. However, we felt that many of his suggestions were exploitative, unimaginative, and lacked any real understanding of actual issues that impact attendees. This prompted us to provide responses to his suggestions and how they don’t align with our values in the hope that this much needed conversation can move into a more constructive and thought-provoking direction.
The author first suggests attracting wider attendance by designing spaces for public celebrity entries to the venue. He then goes on to suggest that celebrity suites be live streamed to provide a constant feed of their reactions rather than a few glimpses that TV cameras catch during a game. We find both suggestions extremely exploitative; they just give us “the ick”. One, there seems to be no acknowledgement from the author that in some instances celebrities are attending this event as spectators, not entertainers. Two, live streaming their reactions, creating what is essentially a “celebrity zoo”, adds no value to those attending the sporting event since it would require you to watch on a device or screen. Three, specific to Swift’s recent attendance, people are looking to connect with the authenticity of her experience. This is the same reason we all love a good baby animal cam at the zoo, it's real. By live streaming, contracts and payment become requirements, shifting them from spectators to entertainers, detracting from the event, minimizing fan engagement, and putting a lot of power into any message that celebrity may want to send.
The author’s other suggestions look at rethinking the pre and post-game activities, an area we agree needs improvement. His suggestion was for stadium design to allow for player-fan interactions by designing a pre-game player arrival space. However, these are not new concepts, many teams already provide suites and spaces adjacent to the locker rooms to give fans a glimpse of the players. At Lumen Field (Seattle Seahawks), the Tunnel Club allows for an up close and personal interaction. At Climate Pledge Arena, the Seattle Kraken walk through a neon-lit hallway where adjacent suites get a view of the team. And at Ball Arena’s (Denver Nuggets) Club Lexus, open windows are adjacent to the area the players use from the court to the locker room. At each of these venues, access requires premium tickets, which restricts access to the space and fails to incorporate the true draw for attending a sporting event, being part of the crowd. People are drawn to attending sporting events for the energy, momentum, and enthusiasm of engaging with a community of other fans; chanting fight songs, waving banners, and sometimes even painting our whole bodies in support. Therefore, the primary design of a stadium should be focused on supporting and improving spaces that benefit and foster this community and the experience for the average attendee.
Most disappointing is that this article feels like it’s just interested in monopolizing on Taylor Swift in the media, instead of really rethinking stadium design to create a better experience for all. This is made clear by what simple solutions are left out of the article that would solve some of the issues a wider demographic of attendees might face. For example, it does not touch on solutions for the dad who brought his young daughter to her first game and she needs a restroom - do they use the men’s or women’s? Or the new mother who came to watch her favorite team missing a significant chunk of the game as she looks for a private, quiet space to pump. Solutions like family style restrooms and parent’s rooms where you can comfortably watch the action are two very simple solutions that would actually improve the experience for all.
Sports fans come from all walks of life, which is what makes sports and entertainment infinitely better. While we are happy that with the help of the Swifties, this inclusive sports design conversation has started, there is still a lot that needs to be rethought and reimagined to design stadiums and arenas. As architects and designers we have an obligation to lead this conversation constructively and with consideration of not only why people go to these spaces, but also what obstacles may take away from these experiences. While our conversation here started in response to an opinion piece, this is not where we would like it to end. In follow up articles we will expand on our design solutions for stadiums and arenas and we hope you will join us in being part of that conversation.