To Whom Much is Given, Much is Required: The Responsibility of Sports Journalist
The Curious Case of Kyrie
By Eric Lambkins II
The media and its influence are potent forces in our society, capable of influencing us to fall in love with villains as heroes and loathe heroes as villains. It shapes public opinion and serves as a watchdog against corruption, reflecting and shaping our societal and cultural mores. Few societal entities are as capable and compelling in informing, educating, entertaining, and persuading as the media. This influence is particularly evident in the intricate and often divisive public perception of NBA star Kyrie Irving.
Kyrie Irving's public journey in the public eye has been a Sturm und Drang, marked by tremendous highs and challenging lows. Irving was initially heralded as a basketball savant from his early days as a highly touted teen prodigy and McDonald's All-American as a Duke University commit to his ascent as the number one pick in the NBA Draft.
His role as "Robin" to LeBron James' "Batman" during their time together on the Cleveland Cavaliers earned him widespread acclaim, particularly after hitting the biggest shot in Cleveland franchise history, when he hit the decisive shot to complete the historic comeback in a 3-1 deficit during the 2016 NBA Championship win.
However, a shift began in media narratives when Irving left Cleveland in the trade that sent him to the Boston Celtics as he stepped from underneath James' shadow. The media began to scrutinize Irving and his moves in his quest to be his own man and lead a team in his image. His national perception went sour after Irving reneged on a promise to re-sign with the franchise, opting to sign with the Brooklyn Nets instead as a free agent in 2019.
Scrutiny around Irving intensified after he opted to eschew signing a four-year, $100 million contract extension with the Nets after missing 53 games due to selecting not to receive the COVID-19 vaccine; a stance that cost him approximately $18 million in missed games and fueled widespread criticism.
"I gave up four years, $100-something million deciding to be unvaccinated," Irving said at a Nets media day. "That was the decision, [sign a] contract, get vaccinated or be unvaccinated, and there's a level of uncertainty of your future, whether you're going to be in this league, whether you're going to be on this team..."
Irving's controversial positions and remarks, such as his belief in a flat Earth, further fueled the media's vitriol and derision, being painted as an aloof and polarizing figure. His tweet promoting the film, "Hebrews to Negroes: Wake Up Black America," a documentary the Anti-Defamation League condemned for its "antisemitic content," led to a firestorm of backlash, resulting in the loss of his Nike endorsement and near exclusion from professional basketball. Irving's refusal to condemn the documentary and delete the tweet only amplified the critique surrounding him, and his decision to delete the tweet three days after he doubled down on his position did little to mitigate the damage.
High-profile and corporate media figures like Stephen A. Smith enflamed the rage and impassioned the doubts about Irving's future in the league, labeling him untrustworthy.
"Nobody is going to trust him for an extension," Smith said.
Sports marketing analysts predicted significant financial losses in endorsements, suggesting corporate sponsors would avoid having Irving as a brand ambassador. Bob Dorfman, a sports marketing analyst at Pinnacle Advertising in San Francisco, proclaimed, "Kyrie is poison to advertisers. If Nike doesn't drop him, they definitely won't renew his deal that expires after this season. And no new sponsors will go near him; who knows what incendiary move he'll make next? Expect this will cost him hundreds of millions in endorsement dollars over the course of his career. His only hope now is a 180-degree personality turnaround and a ring or two—but I just don't see it happening."
The narratives surrounding Irving may have contributed to and influenced his omission from the NBA's 75th Anniversary Team, a list compiled by media members, and the USA Basketball team preparing for the Paris Olympics, despite his undeniable on-court talent.
Irving's off-court humanitarian efforts and contributions have gone widely unnoticed and underreported due to the abundance of negative media attention surrounding him. Through the KAI Empowerment Initiative, Irving donated $1.5 million to supplement the incomes of WNBA players who opted not to play during 2020 due to social justice issues or COVID-19 concerns. He has been a staunch advocate for the Black Lives Matter movement and has made numerous charitable donations. In 2023 alone, Irving made significant contributions to various causes, including providing access to clean water in Flint, Michigan, a bevy of legal defense funds, and supplementing the financial needs of a scholar at Howard University to continue her education. He also gave financial support to victims of various tragedies.
Irving's multifaceted persona is further highlighted by his naming ceremony with a Standing Rock Sioux tribe, where he was named "Hela" or "little mountain." This honor reflects his deep connections and respect within and for different communities, contrasting with his often-vilified public image.
The undeniably complex portrayal of Kyrie Irving in the media reflects and maligns the athletic and cultural brilliance through the controversies surrounding him. The duality of the reporting makes him one of the more intriguing and debated figures in the contemporary era of sports. While Irving's actions and statements have undoubtedly contributed to his image's polarization, the media's function in shaping and crafting narratives surrounding him cannot be overstated and overlooked. As a mirror and molder of societal values, the media can elevate and diminish, making its influence on public perception both profound and far-reaching.
The Mamba versus the Media: From Hero to Villain Back to Hero Again
By Mykell Mathieu
"You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
Although this quote is from the 2008 release of The Dark Knight, the sentiment best describes the basketball career of the late great Kobe Bryant.
Bryant was drafted by the Los Angeles Lakers in the legendary 1996 NBA Draft straight out of high school. He was the first guard to be selected straight from high school, bucking the trend of only big men making the jump.
Coming into the NBA, Bryant was loved and adored. His early play led to some in the media calling him the "next Michael Jordan." As he continued to grow in the league, his name, likeness, and image were everywhere. Deals with Coca-Cola, McDonald's, Adidas, Nintendo, and several otters, Kobe Bryant was well on his way to becoming the face of the NBA and sports culture.
With MJ's retirement, Shaq and Kobe's success, and the Lakers' winning three straight championships from 1999 to 2002, Kobe became a worldwide phenomenon. Then, the 2003 sexual assault case in Colorado tarnished Kobe Bryant's reputation and threatened to end his career.
The court resolved the criminal case 14 months later after the accuser decided not to testify. A civil suit brought by the accuser in the summer of 2004 was settled out of court on March 2, 2005, marking the end of the legal saga that drew worldwide attention but never resulted in an actual trial.
This case turned Bryant from a media darling to a villain, and Bryant embraced the role. Still, the sudden rift with the media forever changed the life of Kobe "Bean" Bryant.
Bryant was no longer the "face of the league," which allowed LeBron James to take over that title even though Kobe was in the prime of his career. The media blamed Bryant for the beef with Shaq, leading to O'Neal's trade from the Lakers.
The media's negative portrayal of Bryant could have impacted his winning or losing the most prestigious individual trophy in the NBA: MVP.
Kobe put together back-to-back amazing individual seasons during the 2005-06 and 2006-07 seasons, in which he averaged 30+ points a game. He led a porous Lakers roster to the playoffs in the toughest Western Conference the league has ever seen!
With the media voting for all the major NBA awards, Bryant lost out on two MVP awards, which some have said he should've won, although he didn't even finish in the top two of voting.
The media at the time went from calling Bryant the "next Jordan" to saying, 'He could never be Jordan,' while other stars received most of the praise. He was still a fantastic player, but his image was never the same.
Though he added two more championships to his resume, the love was never the same after the incident in Colorado.
In his final season in the NBA, Kobe received the love that was expected earlier in his career. But even then, the praise for him never felt the same.
Due to his untimely passing, Kobe receives much more love and respect from those media members who gave him the most challenging times of his career.
But to this day, sports analysts like Stephen A. Smith downplay his greatness on the court. Some of the negativity results from Bryant missing out on MVP awards that he could've won in the prime of his career. Awards that the media played a part in him losing even though he was the most deserving player.
The rise and fall from grace Kobe Bryant experience is a prime example of how the media can truly dictate how players are viewed and, for better or worse - impact their careers.
To Whom Much is Given, Much is Required: The Responsibility of Sports Journalist
by Jackie Rae
The adage "To whom much is given, much is required" resonates deeply across various contexts. For some, it's a Biblical verse, while others recall it as Uncle Ben's wise words to Spider-Man moments before Peter Parker's failure to heed this advice led to tragic consequences.
However you interpret it, this saying encapsulates a profound truth that journalists, in particular, should take to heart. Whether we cover sports, news, entertainment, or lifestyle, we share a common thread: the ability to inform and influence the public.
Journalism carries an immense responsibility. We shape narratives, mold perceptions, and, at times, sway public opinion. Yet, the ethical weight of our words is often overshadowed by sensationalism and the relentless pursuit of viewership. In the realm of sports journalism, this is especially poignant. We are tasked with providing expert analysis and informed opinions. We are the experts the weekend warrior fan relies on to help them seem informed when debating an athlete's prowess over a beer. But, the line between critique and character assassination is thin and often dangerous.
Consider Stephen A. Smith, a prominent sports journalism figure with well-established expertise and credibility. Despite his accolades, Smith has frequently wielded his platform with a recklessness that underscores the potential harm of unchecked commentary. One glaring example is his treatment of NBA star Jaylen Brown.
Brown is an extraordinary individual, both on and off the court. His accomplishments extend far beyond basketball. He excelled academically, earning opportunities from prestigious institutions like NASA and MIT. His humanitarian efforts, including his vocal stance on social justice issues, highlight a character of depth and integrity. Yet, despite these commendable traits, Brown has faced undue criticism, often rooted in subjective perceptions rather than objective facts.
With his considerable influence, Smith recently relayed an anonymous source's claim that Brown is "not liked" due to an "I'm better than you" attitude. Such statements are not only unfounded but dangerously perpetuate harmful stereotypes, particularly against a young Black man. The repercussions of this kind of rhetoric are significant, potentially impacting Brown's reputation and career.
As seasoned journalists, we bear the responsibility of understanding the power our words wield. While it is not our duty to predict every public reaction, it is imperative that we maintain a level of integrity and consistency. Unverified sources and unfounded personal attacks have no place in ethical journalism or sports commentary. Criticism should be rooted in facts. Yes, we can draw personal conclusions based on those facts, but it's never in good form to defame.
Stephen A. Smith is not without his moments of praise for Brown, but the negative comments often resonate louder and linger longer in the public consciousness. This imbalance can skew perceptions and unfairly tarnish the image of individuals who have done nothing to deserve such treatment.
In our pursuit of storytelling, we must remember the gravity of our role. We are more than conveyors of information; we are custodians of truth and shapers of discourse. Our credibility hinges on our ability to report responsibly and ethically. When all else fails, consistency and accountability should guide our actions. If we cannot substantiate a claim, we must refrain from making it. To attack someone's character based on an unnamed source is not just poor journalism—it is a betrayal of the trust placed in us by the public.
Journalism is a privilege, and with that privilege comes the duty to uphold the highest standards of integrity. To whom much is given, much is indeed required. Let us strive to meet that requirement with honor and diligence.