1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

LZ Granderson on athletes and social causes

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Eagles1 in London, Jul 2, 2007.

  1. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=granderson/070702

    I'm sure this has been debated a million times here, but thought this was worth posting.

    Powerful athletes like MJ and Tiger don't have to do a damn thing if they don't want to. However, I have always believed that real change takes place when people who don't have to do anything decide to do something.
  2. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    It's an interesting argument. On the one hand, you regularly hear people tell Bono and Angelina Jolie to STFU and complain that they think their opinions matter. "Shut up and play" is often kind of what we hear.

    Yet, when it comes to MJ and Tiger, people seem to want them to be the next Ali. It's kind of a lose-lose situation for them.

    However, Granderson makes the valid point that there's plenty of stuff they could do that isn't controversial. No one is going to say, "He wants to fix AIDS in Africa? Fuck that. Johnny put down his shoes, we're buying Starburys."

    I imagine both Tiger and MJ do a lot of stuff that we don't hear too much about. The question is, is there a need for them to visible and vocal leaders for social change? I say only if their hearts are in it and they certainly don't seem to be.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page