Sharp writing in story on NBA executive coming out

I just worry about the backlash Russell may get from the black religious community for not coming out and lambasting the guy. Some of the worst under-the-radar homophobia in this country comes from black churches, and it doesn't get much coverage.

 

Stephon Marbury or Slick Watts would have provided some good quotes.

 

When Sheryl Swoopes came out, wasn't the release handled by an advocacy group and the story engineered similarly? I would be interested to know if there was a similar go-between in this case or if it really was Welts calling up the reporter.

 

A few things.

Good for Welts for lining up the Times. The guy is in PR for crying out loud. Just because it's a very personal thing for him, doesn't mean he can't also plan it for the greatest public impact. For me, that doesn't make it less than genuine or somehow tainted. Just makes it smart.

If I have a black superior who I feel is salt of the earth, otherwise self-deprecating and, pretty much, through the course of his life, a harbinger of what is good and just, but finds amusement in the irony, given the history of our nation, of his being my superior, and his way of making light of it is to refer to me as "white boy," it's all right with me. For me, all of these things are relative. Yes, I know, there's the old "What if a white person called a black person (any type of perceived slur)?" like that explains everything. Well, let's play that one out. I would think it possibly racist and certainly reflective of some dark place in that person's heart. (Fuzzy Zoeller, I think, is a great guy, but he revealed something bad about himself with his Tiger quote at the Masters; Larry Cochell is a fantastic, benevolent man, but he also revealed something inside him, something I don't even think he knew was there, when he said what he said that ultimately led to his resignation as Oklahoma baseball coach; I'm sure there are other examples). And still, coming out of Bill Russell's mouth, I don't think it says anything other than the fact that Russell has a sense of humor and, like a cogent comedian, can't stand any elephants in the room. Doesn't bother me a bit.

How can anybody call this a non-story?
It seems to have been orchestrated, but it remains a story; and a bigger story given what Kobe called the official. Until we actually yawn at something like this, it's a story. And the only way we get there in even the next few years is if everybody comes out tomorrow. We're a long way away.

Yes, the grabbing paragraph is the Kobe "faggot" quote.

As proof, I offer this: I always figured that was the slur Kobe used, but I had yet to see it written, on a page or a screen. It IS jarring. In retrospect, what's amazing to me is how quickly that story was over with. Because, to me, that's N-word territory. Doesn't make Kobe a homophobe (or Michael Richards a racist), but there's a dark place in each of their souls they might want to look into. Kobe's saying that it's just a phrase that came out in the heat of battle is, well, denial. He's lying to himself.

 

I loved the juxtaposition but was so caught off-guard that anyone would call Kobe Bryant a forward at this point in his career. Really? He's been called the best shooting guard since Jordan for almost a decade. How do you make that mistake?

 

well, just speaking for myself, i didn't call it a 'non-story,' just said it's far from the bombshell, 'prominent sports gay guy comes-out' we're all waiting for and consider inevitable. this was far from that, because of the guy's public no-profile. he's not the 'sports star' comes out we're waiting the break. this is a no-name exec of any huge corporation coming out; news? i suppose so, although i don't consider this guy to be any sort of 'public figure.'

he's just a guy who works for the nba. a 'whoop,' perhaps, but certainly no 'big whoop.'...

 

Another story, by Dana O'Neil, about former Villanova player Will Sheridan. If you had to compare the reporting and writing...the Times story doesn't come close.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/columns/story?columnist=oneil_dana&id=6488036


ps--Are we eventually going to get to a point when outing confessions no longer have to be new items?

 

Hear what you are saying but it's a different world today. A superior calling one of his employees "white boy" would be grounds for termination.

Obviously not main focus of story, but ironic given the topic.

 

The Kobe incident coming the day after he told Stern did sort of "put it in perspective" but then the writer didn't follow up on it.

He didn't ask Stern if the discussion he had the previous day weighed on his mind as he mulled Kobe's punishment. he didn't get a quote from Kobe.

He mentions Hardaway's previous statement, but doesn't contact him.

What 21 writes here appears to be correct:

This just makes it seem more like a press release put together by a PR agency that the Times ran in full. What work did the Times do on this?

They told his story, exactly how and when he wanted it told. They talked to the people he directed them to and apparently no one else.

It might be a nice story, but is that what newspapers do?

 

A few things.

Good for Welts for lining up the Times. The guy is in PR for crying out loud. Just because it's a very personal thing for him, doesn't mean he can't also plan it for the greatest public impact. For me, that doesn't make it less than genuine or somehow tainted. Just makes it smart.

If I have a black superior who I feel is salt of the earth, otherwise self-deprecating and, pretty much, through the course of his life, a harbinger of what is good and just, but finds amusement in the irony, given the history of our nation, of his being my superior, and his way of making light of it is to refer to me as "white boy," it's all right with me. For me, all of these things are relative. Yes, I know, there's the old "What if a white person called a black person (any type of perceived slur)?" like that explains everything. Well, let's play that one out. I would think it possibly racist and certainly reflective of some dark place in that person's heart. (Fuzzy Zoeller, I think, is a great guy, but he revealed something bad about himself with his Tiger quote at the Masters; Larry Cochell is a fantastic, benevolent man, but he also revealed something inside him, something I don't even think he knew was there, when he said what he said that ultimately led to his resignation as Oklahoma baseball coach; I'm sure there are other examples). And still, coming out of Bill Russell's mouth, I don't think it says anything other than the fact that Russell has a sense of humor and, like a cogent comedian, can't stand any elephants in the room. Doesn't bother me a bit.

How can anybody call this a non-story?
It seems to have been orchestrated, but it remains a story; and a bigger story given what Kobe called the official. Until we actually yawn at something like this, it's a story. And the only way we get there in even the next few years is if everybody comes out tomorrow. We're a long way away.

Yes, the grabbing paragraph is the Kobe "faggot" quote.

As proof, I offer this: I always figured that was the slur Kobe used, but I had yet to see it written, on a page or a screen. It IS jarring. In retrospect, what's amazing to me is how quickly that story was over with. Because, to me, that's N-word territory. Doesn't make Kobe a homophobe (or Michael Richards a racist), but there's a dark place in each of their souls they might want to look into. Kobe's saying that it's just a phrase that came out in the heat of battle is, well, denial. He's lying to himself.

Hear what you are saying but it's a different world today. A superior calling one of his employees "white boy" would be grounds for termination.I think my point on that is this. It would be cause for termination in most contexts. But out of the mouth of Bill Russell, it simply carries no baggage for me. Generally, yes, it's not a good thing to say. It's misguided, lost in time, silly and stupid. But out of Bill Russell's mouth a generation ago, it is by no means offensive. Russell make it all right (for Russell).

 

Clearly I don't know how to use all the tools of this board.

 

I'm not going to beat up Bill Russell.

Russell surely dealt with a ton of racism in his day. More than I'll ever understand, and more than African-Americans go through today (in general).

He's an old man and it was 30 years ago. We should take into account his age, the time, and his friendship.

But, we should also give others the benefit of the doubt from time to time too. Everyone is a product of their time and environment. Sure, you need to overcome blatant racism. But the words and phrases someone of a previous generation chooses will be different. We don't need to condemn everyone who chooses his words poorly on occasion.