The boundaries of public discourse have widened post-Trump, and I’m not sure where those boundaries are today.
What would you have done about Jemele Hill? Hill, one of ESPN’s primary studio hosts, created a stir last week via a series of tweets she issued about President Trump. Among other things, Hill said Trump is a white supremacist who surrounds himself with other white supremacists. Trump and his press secretary are calling for Hill’s head. Others are defending her.
Would you have fired Hill? There are at least two reasons you might.
First, Hill tweeted from an account (@gemelehill) that blends personal and professional identities: “Co-host of the 6pm SportsCenter, aka The Six. Born and raised in Detroit. Grew up at Michigan State.”
Second, Hill violated ESPN policy. ESPN asks employees to restrict their social media activity to sports-related matters. Hill’s tweets had nothing to do with either sports or her job at the network.
Courtesy: Business Insider
The situation is dicey for ESPN. The network has been accused of having a liberal bias in the people it hires and retains. Not long ago the network terminated the contract of former Red Sox star, Curt Schilling, after he posted right-wing memes on social media. And Trump blasted ESPN for not punishing Hill:
ESPN is paying a really big price for its politics (and bad programming). People are dumping it in RECORD numbers. Apologize for untruth! 4:20 AM – 15 Sep 2017
Politically, Hill is anything but right-wing. Stephen A. Crockett described her this way: “Hill is a throwback to a 1960s revolutionary…/and/…is in line with black women today. (Truthfully, black men, black women have been killing us on the “Stand up for yourselves” front.) They don’t take anything lying down.”
Hill has since apologized to the network for her tweets. ESPN accepted her apology. The network didn’t suspend or fired her.
But ESPN John Skipper did use the incident to remind employees of the company’s policy: “[W]e have social media policies which require people to understand that social platforms are public and their comments on them will reflect on ESPN. At a minimum, comments should not be inflammatory or personal.”
Courtesy: Triple Ethos
That’s a telling response to a situation that—only a short time ago—might have been managed differently. Consider how ESPN handled the Bill Simmons matter. Simmons, who’s a popular figure with American sports fans, is an imaginative/visionary producer of sports commentary and other content. He was an ESPN star, too. But in 2014 he was suspended by the network after making a disparaging remark during a podcast about NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Simmons and the network later parted ways.
While there’s likely more to the story about Simmons’ departure, the reality is that he’s no longer with ESPN. So why didn’t ESPN do more than reprimand Hill?
I wondered (as did The Washington Post) whether Simmons would answer that very question. Last Friday he did—in response to a question posed by a reader at Simmons’ website, “The Ringer.” Q: Does it bother you that ESPN suspended you for three weeks for calling Goodell a liar, but they didn’t suspend Jemele Hill for calling Trump a white supremacist?
Simmons answered: “It doesn’t bother me. Neither of us should have been suspended. But I enjoyed how brilliantly Jemele checkmated her bosses. She knew ESPN couldn’t punish her for speaking candidly, as a black woman, about a president whose pattern of behavior toward women and minorities speaks for itself. She used her platform and it worked. Now, she has a higher profile than she did three days ago. She seems more fearless and genuine than she did three days ago. She doubled down on a fan base that already liked her and openly shunned the other side. And she flipped her relationship with ESPN—now, the company needs Jemele Hill more than she needs the company.”
Yes, Hill is an African-American woman who spoke truth to power. She also occupies a media platform that would seem to make her unrelatable to most Americans. But her situation is relatable to millions of everyday people – especially women, people of color, and many other “targets” of Trump’s angst. Many are doing, and will do, just what Hill did—speak out.
An open question is whether ESPN’s handling of the Hill situation will make it more difficult for companies to impose sanctions when employees speak out politically.
Those boundaries have widened post-Trump and I’m not sure where those boundaries are today. For evidence, just check the content on your Facebook Newsfeed.
We have an ESPN personality who called our president a white supremacist. And we have a president who recently tweeted a video of himself driving a golf ball into the back of Hillary Clinton.
That’s where we are. Who could have ever imagined?
Right! Who could have ever imagined? Thank you for the challenging, thought provoking article. The field of sports has never been truly isolated from the game of life.