@Lash,
Quote:Should we all list our private sins and stand ready to be judged by the public
In Sterling's case, these sins haven't all been private. His racial discrimination, in who he would rent housing to, certainly wasn't private, nor were his offensive remarks about that, and he paid a settlement of over $2 million for one of those cases. His bigotry, and knowledge of it, really isn't anything new.
But this time, for whatever reason, his more recent remarks really struck a nerve, particularly with players and prominent former players, and they began weighing in fairly fast, with their demands about how they wanted the NBA to respond. So the players, through the players union, definitely had input into the decision about what to do about Sterling. And the NBA players, I think, are about 80% black. This situation gave them the opportunity to flex some influence in an area of the NBA they generally aren't involved in, and they took it. If they could finally help get rid of this known-to-be bigoted owner, they were pushing for it, and demanding it.
And the corporate sponsors also reacted immediately, and began withdrawing support.
The media had a juicy story with a leaked phone conversation, and later interview, with a girlfriend that had all the elements--sex, money, power, race, professional sports, etc.--to make for a flurry of talk and airtime, but I didn't hear people screaming for Sterling's head. There was no media driven campaign I saw to oust him. And the media interest in this whole business already seems on the wane, other than some continuing gossip about the girlfriend, and interest in the legal logistics and how those might play out.
And the public? I don't know that many people really care about this elderly billionaire team owner, or what happens to him in terms of his ownership. He's not a sympathetic figure, and he is bigoted, but I don't see people getting worked up about him one way or the other. Sterling's also not Paula Deen--she at least had fans, he doesn't seem to. Few, for instance, seem particularly upset that the NBA has already banned him for life.
So I see no public mobs, or media campaign, going after him. I mainly see Sterling as being judged by the NBA, because of how his remarks affected
them, their image, their business and financial interests, their ability to keep the sport and players functioning, and how he could continue to affect them in the future, if they don't get him out, and force him to sever his ownership ties to
them. It's essentially an internal problem for the NBA. The media and the public are mainly outside observers watching it unfold, and it remains to be seen how long they will remain interested.
And the somewhat murky world of professional sports and team ownerships seems to have its own rule book, and procedures, and legalities that most of us know next to nothing about, and generally aren't interested in. Owning a franchise isn't like owning a private business, and the NBA has to juggle interests other than Donald Sterling, and interests more important to them than just Donald Sterling. Bigotry isn't going to be solved by getting this one owner out, and everyone knows that, but the NBA's problems, stemming from the release of his remarks, could mushroom if they don't try to get him out and disconnected from
them.
The worst that will happen to Sterling, if he's forced to sell, is that he'll owe a whopping capital gains tax because his asset has so grossly increased in value. And that's a main reason there aren't many hearts weeping for him.
