This week has seen pro athletes across multiple sports walkout in protest over the shooting of Jacob Blake by the Kenosha, WI Police Department. Baseball, Basketball, Hockey, Soccer, and Football have all seem games or practices disrupted.
Like just about every issue in America, the public reaction on this has split mainly along partisan lines. People on the right want athletes to “play the game.” People on the left think the athletes are taking a bold stand or not taking enough concrete action.
In reality, the situation is far more complicated than that. This is not a situation or circumstance that fits nicely into the zero-sum-game-you’re-either-for-me-or-against-me political hellscape we are currently living in.
On one hand: Pro athletes should be commended for taking a stand for something. So often athletes get pigeonholed as jocks who only care about their athletic performance. We know that to not be true. Athletes are complicated people just like the rest of us. While no doubt some fall into the celebrity trap, many others are activists, philanthropists, and businessmen.
There’s a risk factor in saying that you are not going to play. Any time that you take a public stand for something that will ultimately be seen as political there is a risk. that you will alienate your fan base and in the case of those who own businesses or endorse products may impact their bottom line beyond the field. There is always a chance that a player could be disciplined for not playing; after all, refusing to play is a violation of their contract.
The fact that the players took action, despite all of that, helps raise attention to the severity of the issue at hand and how important the issue is to the players.
On the other hand: Pro athletes have the ultimate flexibility in taking such public stands. It’s easy to stand up when you’re making $14,000,000 a year in salary playing baseball and not $40,000 a year working in a factory. It’s easy to be proactive in taking a stand when you can’t easily be replaced. It’s not like they’re gonna take ten people off the street, put them in Lakers and Clippers uniforms, and tell them to go play five-on-five.
At the same time: I can only help but wonder: what would the reaction be if an athlete wanted to protest and walk out of a game for a different issue than this?
Say a few players want to walk out in support of abolishing private gun ownership. What would the players do? Would teammates walkout in solidarity with their teammates even if they don’t agree/ What would the owners do? What would the fans do? What would the media reaction be?
On the other side of the ledger, say a few players want to walk out in support of ending abortion. What would the players do? Would teammates walkout in solidarity with their teammates even if they don’t agree/ What would the owners do? What would the fans do? What would the media reaction be?
When you consider how many opinions players have and how many hot-button issues players could be upset about, would the reaction be any different in the media? And would your reaction be any different if the issue were different?
Then we have the slippery slope: One of the more disturbing things I have seen in all of the coverage in this has been the idea of some that team owners should have to make political donations to specific candidates supporting issues supported by the players. This was reported by The Athletic:
Sources said LeBron said he wanted more action from owners on racial justice matters; it’s possible the owners could put together an action plan that convinces the two L.A. teams to stay and play. The Bucks want the Wisconsin state legislature to convene and pass stricter safety protocols for police to follow.
For example, the owners could agree to fund political advertisements or even campaigns for candidates who would support the players’ causes.
Any time you have players dictating political activity, it becomes problematic (more on that in a minute). But what really disturbs me is the idea that owners should fund political advertisements or candidates for office who support what the players want. Why should the owners pay for this? Every player who plays professional sports has a tremendous amount of disposable income. It’s not much of a lift for them to max out a donation to the political cause of their choosing. Nor would it be very hard for players to band together to create a Super PAC to fund whatever issues and whatever candidate campaigns they want. Why should team owners be expected to foot the bill to support the players politics?
(As an side, LeBron James talking about action on racial justice is also appalling given his own spotty track record on this, with his comments about China and the fact that the sneakers that have made him a millions are made in sweatshops in China. LeBron is the ultimate hypocrite here)
Finally: There’s the long tail of all of this.
People want to watch sports to get away from politics and the absolute dumpster fire 2020 has been for the country. Now, even that is not safe from political machinations.
How many people are just going to turn off the television and not come back? How many people are not going to buy a ticket? Or a t-shirt?
Now sure, that’s not going to be a majority of the people. I’m certainly not going to stop being an Orioles or Ravens fans even if I don’t necessarily agree with ther statements they’ve made.
Where players might really get into trouble is with their political demands. Because no matter which side the players ultimately demand support for, it’s going to tick off a massive chunk of the population in our aforementioned zero-sum-game-you’re-either-for-me-or-against-me political hellscape.
I think back to what Michael Jordan said:
What is the ultimate, long-term financial impact on sports and athletes from not just these protests, but also political advocacy? If you make political statements, you run the risk of alienating a certain percentage of the population. Not all people are going to make decisions based on such a political calculus, but that percentage seems to become larger every day.
On top of it, the entire process, at least for the NBA, seems to have been very messy from the get-go. According to a Yahoo story, It appears the Bucks just decided not to play without telling anybody, which caused meetings and an apparent rift between veterans and rookies, and between the NBA Players Association Executive Director and Players.
In conclusion: These issue are complicated. These issues are emotional. These issues are nuanced. And it’s ok to feel conflicted: I certainly do. What happens next will determine the future of pro sports in the American cultural landscape.