|
Post by cityofchamps on Jul 20, 2015 0:10:50 GMT -5
According to Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio, there is a source that says Roger Goodell's ruling on Tom Brady's appeal should come sometime this week (of course, they have been saying that for the past month, so take that with a grain of salt). Florio's reports his source "describes the anticipated outcome as a 'sham,' with litigation to promptly follow." www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/pft-mike-florio-says-tom-brady-ruling-will-come-this-weekOf course, Florio goes all sensationalist on it and tries to make it about race, specifically pointing out that it would cause outrage if a "white franchise quarterback" got total leniency from "the enforcer" Goodell when anyone hardly ever does.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jul 20, 2015 12:39:07 GMT -5
His argument wasn't sensationalism and it wasn't about Brady's race. Your quotation is out of context and misrepresents the article you didn't even link to. Florio wasn't complaining about the racial disparity between treatment for white and black players, he said that others might feel that way. Furthmore, the comparison was much more about defensive end vs franchise quarterback status (note that he didn't say "black defensive end" Greg Hary).
I personally disagree with Florio's argument, but that's not racial sensationalism, it's not even close.
|
|
|
Post by cityofchamps on Jul 20, 2015 13:20:32 GMT -5
His argument wasn't sensationalism and it wasn't about Brady's race. Your quotation is out of context and misrepresents the article you didn't even link to. Florio wasn't complaining about the racial disparity between treatment for white and black players, he said that others might feel that way. Furthmore, the comparison was much more about defensive end vs franchise quarterback status (note that he didn't say "black defensive end" Greg Hary). I personally disagree with Florio's argument, but that's not racial sensationalism, it's not even close. profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/19/brady-ruling-expected-this-week-litigation-seen-as-inevitable/related/Sorry, THAT was the article I meant to link to. And no, it isn't out of context. If he wasn't trying to racially sensationalize it, why did he specifically point it out that Tom Brady being a "white franchise Quarterback" getting leniency from Goodell would unleash a "firestorm" when no one else has gotten that from Goodell? It is clear he was pointing out the fact that all of the other issues that have popped up....Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Greg Hardy, Ray McDonald, etc...all the big ones that have made the news have one thing in common: They are all African American. Not that I am trying to sensationalize that issue, or that I am racist (I am far from it), but that was the point he was clearly trying to make simply by calling Tom Brady "white". Everyone knows that Tom Brady is white, we don't need to be reminded of that fact. Everyone wouldn't have given it a second thought until that article came out. Mike Florio deliberately made it about race.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jul 20, 2015 17:48:15 GMT -5
He didn't go any further than referencing that Tom Brady is white. You can draw whatever connotations you want from it, but Florio didn't mention that Hardy was black, he didn't mention that Peterson was black and he didn't need to. What he needed to do editorially was make the point that whether or not it's coincidental, it looks bad on the NFL to show leniency to white people and strict justice to black offenders. He didn't even imply that leniency to Brady was racially motivated or that tough calls against black players were racial decisions in anyway. He made the point that it looks bad on the NFL to have a bunch of black players get suspended and the one white guy get off. He did it subtly and effectively. You need no further proof than the fact that the top comments in the section don't mention or criticize the "white" comment, and that's something that usually gets called out very quickly by the color-blind internet masses.
|
|
|
Post by cityofchamps on Jul 21, 2015 14:44:13 GMT -5
|
|