Country Branding in Co-Hosted Mega-Events: A Comparative Study of Italy and Türkiye in UEFA Euro 2032

When a country hosts a major international sports tournament, it does more than just open its stadiums; it offers its entire national image to the world. This image is built from a mix of deep history, cultural traditions, and modern capabilities like technology and infrastructure. For decades, researchers have studied how these mental pictures form, noting that people often judge a nation's ability to host based on whether they see it as a place of ancient heritage or a hub of modern engineering. However, when two very different countries team up to host the same event, a new question arises: who gets the attention? In a joint hosting arrangement, the world's gaze does not always split evenly. One partner might dominate the conversation while the other fades into the background, and this imbalance can shape how fans and travelers perceive the entire event long before the first whistle blows. Understanding this dynamic is crucial because the attention a country receives online acts as a signal of its brand strength, independent of whether people like or dislike it.

A recent study by Baris Batuhan Gecit investigates this exact phenomenon by looking at the upcoming UEFA Euro 2032, a football championship uniquely co-hosted by Italy and Türkiye. This pairing is significant because it brings together an experienced host, Italy, which has hosted major tournaments twice before, and a first-time host, Türkiye, which is investing heavily in new infrastructure. The researcher wanted to see how the global football community was talking about these two nations in the years leading up to the tournament. Instead of relying on official press releases or marketing campaigns, the study turned to the raw, unfiltered chatter of fans on the internet. By analyzing thousands of comments on YouTube videos and discussions on Reddit, along with search data from Google, the researcher mapped out where the world's attention was actually landing and what specific topics were driving those conversations.

The investigation began by gathering a massive collection of online text. The researcher collected 1,456 comments from seven popular YouTube videos discussing the tournament's stadium selection and hosting plans. They also gathered 50 comments from five specific discussion threads on Reddit, a popular forum for sports fans. To get a broader sense of interest, they also tracked search trends over a full year. The researcher then carefully read through every single comment, sorting them into categories to see what people were actually saying. They looked for mentions of specific countries, discussions about stadium capacity, talks about renovating old buildings, and references to new construction. To ensure their findings were solid, they had a second team of researchers independently check a large sample of the same comments to see if they agreed on the categories. This process revealed that while some topics were easy to agree on, others, like general feelings of safety or national pride, were too subjective to measure reliably, so the study focused only on the concrete, observable facts that everyone could agree upon.

The results painted a clear picture of an uneven playing field in terms of attention. On YouTube, the platform where most of the data came from, discussions focused on Türkiye were more than three times as common as those focused on Italy. For every one comment about Italy, there were roughly three about Türkiye. This imbalance held true across different languages and different videos, suggesting that the global fan base was naturally drawn to the story of the first-time host. However, the story changed slightly when the researcher looked at Reddit, a different corner of the internet where the ratio flipped, with Italy receiving more attention than Türkiye. This finding suggests that where you look online matters; the distribution of attention is not a fixed rule but depends entirely on the specific community and platform being observed.

Beyond just counting who was mentioned more, the study dug into what people were actually saying about each country. A striking difference emerged regarding the stadiums. When fans talked about Italy, their conversations were heavily anchored in the idea of renovation. They frequently discussed the need to update and refurbish existing, iconic stadiums like the San Siro in Milan or the Stadio Olimpico in Rome. In fact, comments about Italy were nearly five times more likely to mention the renovation of an old stadium than comments about Türkiye. These discussions were often very specific, naming particular historic grounds and debating the details of their modernization. In contrast, the conversation around Türkiye was more spread out, covering a wider range of cities and clubs, and focused more on the sheer capacity of the venues and the advocacy for their inclusion, rather than the specific act of renovating old structures.

The research also highlighted a distinct pattern in how the two nations were perceived regarding their infrastructure. The Italian discourse was characterized by a focus on a small number of famous, named venues and the complex bureaucratic and financial challenges of fixing them. Fans often spoke with a sense of caution, hedging their bets on whether these historic sites would be ready. The Turkish discourse, meanwhile, appeared more expansive, covering a national stock of venues across many cities, from Istanbul to Trabzon, with a strong emphasis on the visual impact and seating capacity of these facilities. While the study could not definitively say whether fans felt positively or negatively about either country, the volume and nature of the conversation revealed a clear narrative: Italy was being viewed through the lens of its historic, aging infrastructure needing care, while Türkiye was being viewed through the lens of its new, distributed capacity.

Ultimately, this study provides a rare glimpse into how the world perceives a co-hosted mega-event before it even begins. It shows that the attention given to each host is not equal and can vary wildly depending on the digital platform. It also demonstrates that the specific attributes fans associate with a host country are not random; they are deeply tied to the reality of that country's situation, such as whether they are renovating old stadiums or building new ones. For the organizers of such events, these findings offer a practical lesson: the brand image of a co-host is not just what they say about themselves, but what the world is actually talking about. The path from online chatter to a successful national reputation is complex, and in the case of Euro 2032, the conversation is currently dominated by the story of the new host, while the experienced host is defined by the challenges of its past.