Several weeks ago, just like millions of Americans across the country, I, too, was glued to the edge of my seat while watching Superbowl 51. What an amazing comeback by the New England Patriots! Congratulations to the Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady for winning his fifth Superbowl, as well as to the Falcons for a superb season.
However, I think the biggest story surrounding the Superbowl occurred after the game was already played. After the Superbowl, stories started coming out about players on the Patriots team who refused to travel to the White House, as is the tradition for all championship winning teams since 1865. As you probably guessed, the majority of these players do not agree with President Trump’s rhetoric and beliefs, and have chosen to not visit the White House.
Hearing about these stories made me reflect on whether politics have a place in the sports world. One the one hand, I think they do belong in sports because ultimately, sports figures and those in the media who cover sports are people. And just like all people, they, too, are entitled to their opinions. These opinions inherently color anything they do or say, including while they’re on the job. In this case, their workplace just so happens to be a major sports league that brings in billions of dollars in revenue annually. One of the most interesting cases in this debate is the Olympic Games, in which sports and politics are inextricable linked. Perhaps the most poignant example for how politics can clash with sports comes from the 1936 Berlin Summer Olympic Games. In these 1936 Games, American track and field star Jessie Owens faced adversity for being an African American competing in what were termed “Hitler’s Olympics.” He ended up shocking not only the Germans, but the entire world when he won 4 gold medals in the 100 meter, 200 meter, long jump, and 4 x 100 meter relay events.
On the other hand, involving politics with something are pure as athletic competition can put off many fans (especially those who contribute to the huge revenues the sports world brings in, from ticket sales to merchandise sales). This is quite understandable. Consider this: Say you’re a basketball fan and your favorite player suddenly announces on Twitter that he supports the political party that you vehemently oppose. This can lead to cognitive dissonance in the fan’s mind, and would probably cause them to pick a new favorite player or team. Personally, I feel that fans pay exorbitant amounts of money to watch athletes compete at the highest levels of competition, and they rightfully expect these players to focus only on the game at hand and leave their personal identities off the field.
The conclusion that I have come to, and one which seems the most fair to me, is that athletes should be free (even encouraged) to pursue whatever political agenda/ideology they support (but it would be best if this were done privately), as long as it does not interfere whatsoever with their on-the-field performance. For example, athletes shouldn’t wear stickers or badges representing a political party on their game uniform or team locker. Athletes’ personal and professional lives should be separated as much as possible to avoid any controversy.
Please comment below and let me know what your thoughts are on this debate! Do you think politics have a place in the sports world?
Hello Akshil! I had some recent discussions on this topic, and came to a similar conclusion as you, but for different reasons. I too think that athletes should be free to express themselves politically and ideologically. Freedom of speech and expression are included in everyone’s First Amendment rights, so there is no reason that athletes should have these rights abridged simply because they are in the public eye. I have found that many people like to analyze whether it is a good idea for athletes to express themselves politically/ideologically; I tend to look at it from a different perspective. Rather than asking whether the athletes should express themselves, I ask why we care about athletes’ political views.
Athletic prowess has no relationship with well-developed political ideology; the fact that someone is talented at throwing a ball and is thus in the public eye should not give them intellectual credibility. Politicians, business leaders, academics, trusted friends and family, and similar figures may actually influence me, as their ideas hold a certain sway in my mind. The guy (or girl) I watch play a sport each week should not. Unfortunately, it seems that in the modern world, athletes’ every move and word are intensely scrutinized. Just last week, Cleveland Cavaliers point guard Kyrie Irving made headlines for his remarks that he believes the earth is flat. What I found most entertaining was Irving’s remarks several days later: “The fact that it’s a social phenomenon – ‘Kyrie thinks the world is flat’ – is hilarious to me… that it could actually be news.” All Irving wanted to do was think of the most unbelievable thing possible and see how much of a reaction he as a basketball player could get from stating a ridiculous astronomic opinion. If you simply Google, “Kyrie Irving flat earth”, you will see for yourself that we as a modern society care way too much about athletes’ opinions.
Though Jesse Owens is a good example of a successful influence of sports on politics, I think that in general the two are not a good combination. In the case of the Olympics, the USA boycotted the 1980 Moscow Games as a political statement. For many athletes, this caused the forfeiture of years of training and dedication, throwing away the goal to which they had dedicated most of their young lives. Hostilities stemming from a 1969 soccer match between Honduras and El Salvador actually helped contribute to the outbreak of a war between the two countries. Even the Patriots’ White House protests are depriving the players of the chance to visit one of the most historic (and inaccessible) sites in the country, regardless of its occupant. Though athletes have every right to express themselves as they wish, I don’t think the result of such expressions are generally fruitful, and don’t understand why we as a society place so much weight on such expressions. Personally, I prefer the Tom Brady approach. The Patriots quarterback is rumored to be personal friends with Donald Trump, a topic that was investigated heavily this past season. All he says on the matter is that he is a friend of Trump but that the friendship doesn’t necessarily equate to agreeing with everything Trump says or does. No controversy is needed, and Brady understands that people should be forming their political beliefs through facts, analysis, and discussion, not through the words of a celebrity.