Is the media negatively biased towards outspoken athletes of color⁉️
Well, the NBA has had its share of storylines this season, and the most tumultuous character thus far has definitely been Kyrie Irving.
Kyrie has exposed the media by just existing, having opinions that don’t align with commonly known narratives has made him a target.
“How so…?”, you ask.
Well the latest tiff between Stephen A Smith and Jay Williams on ESPN’s ‘First Take’ after news of Kyrie asking for a trade highlights this truth.
Jay-Will accused Smith of having a personal beef against Irving, and it was met with an emotional response as he defended his position.
That was the convo on the surface…
…but let’s pull back some layers and analyze what was REALLY being said.
Williams was basically accusing Smith of following the media’s agenda to paint Kyrie as a villain.
Is this a thing?
Yes, issa thing.
Flat earth comments aside, Irving’s decision to not receive the jab sparked a controversy that put him in the limelight as a negative integer.
The tweeting of the link to the documentary film, ‘Hebrews to Negroes’ made him public enemy number one.
Seemingly, in America, a melanated man’s road to redemption after being vilified doesn’t attract media attention.
…it’s obviously a lot more intoxicating to drag them through the mud while the world watches.
This is what the two analysts were arguing about. Jay calling Stephen out, and him denying it vehemently.
…but I promise the evidence doesn’t look good in regards to the history of the media’s stance this season.
There are 3 incidents in particular that prove it.
While Kyrie was suspended this year for sharing a link, a bunch of “experts” on a multitude of networks all chimed in to not only suggest that he might be retired, but also ludicrously suggesting that the Nets were better without him. (How Sway?) Irving is a Top 5 player right now. The talking points were akin to pitch forks and tiki-torches. The level of absurdity can only be made logical by assuming they were running a campaign for that narrative to come to fruition.
Steve Nash. The irony here isn’t very comical at all. If fact, it reminds me of a time in the NFL when commentators were getting flack for how they spoke about “black” quarterbacks versus their “white” counterparts. It’s truly amazing how when Kyrie returned and Nash was fired, the Nets went on a winning streak. An adjective to describe the lack of fair reporting doesn’t exist. This was down right foul, flagrant even. How can these “experts” call for this man’s retirement one week only to completely glaze over the fact of how bad Nash was as a coach the week following? Zero stories on this position, and it should be an embarrassment.
Luka Magic not playing Kylie’s 1st game seemed almost scripted. Guess what? The Mavs dominated the clippers on his debut with a balanced scoring attack, only one person on the team didn’t score. Irving led the team in points, was closing out on defense against Paul George AND Kawhi late in the 4th, and secured the last rebound on defense to solidify the victory. If the media is truly unbiased then we should be hearing storylines of how the Mavs are now better without Luka, right? …but that’s crazy talk. You know what else is crazy? Sports pundits not spinning the story to relay the notion that Dallas is now a legit title contender.
The most comical aspect of this is what I seen on a YouTube channel named, NBA NEWS TODAY, a channel with 118k subs. The click bait title on the video read, “without him, we still win” Cam calls Irving a jerk, no need for Kyrie.
(Hours after trade)
False statements excluded, the very thought of this is reminiscent to a Kobe quote, “That’s a bikram yoga stretch…”
Stop the Cap.
The idiocy of the situation is playing out in real time and the talking heads are spinning webs of ridiculous narratives that try to overshadow Irving’s greatness.
Because he’s a melanated masterpiece that has taken accountability for not only what’s on his mind, but for a culture of disenfranchised people that look like him.